Ag Retail Business News

Don’t Rush The Replant: Field Conditions And ROI Outweigh The Calendar

Thu, 14 May 2026 20:34:56 GMT

Corn and soybean growers facing slow emergence, shrinking planting windows and cool soils shouldn’t reach for the replant button too quickly, say University of Wisconsin’s Harkirat Kaur and Shawn Conley. They emphasize that field conditions, stand uniformity and return on investment matter more than the date on the calendar.

When damage occurs in corn, the first step is to diagnose what happened to cause the loss, advises Harkirat Kaur, Extension corn specialist at the university.

“Are you seeing stand loss because of seedling issues? Was the hybrid vigor not there? Is there waterlogging? Those things are important to understand, because replanting a field which is damaged is still an extra cost that we incur,” Kaur says.

She believes stand uniformity often matters more than the plant population for corn.

“A uniform stand at a low population is better than having a stand which is at a higher population but has quite a few gaps in it,” she says. “No. 1, it will impact your overall nutrient uptake for the entire field. Secondly, it will also impact your overall operations as you move further into the season.”

Calendar date, surviving stand quality and hybrid maturity all have to be weighed together in the decision.

“If you are looking at a surviving stand which is less than 70% of what your original target was, then you might want to go for a replant,” Kaur says. “But is that replant going to be this soon? It depends if the field is clearly showing no signs of recovery, showing a complete loss of uniformity across the field.”

In many cases, she recommends patience – especially when a frost or hail event enters the picture.

“It is always good to give the crop some time to recover,” she advises, particularly when hail strikes while the growing point is still below ground. “Most of the corn plants in May or early June have their growing point still under the ground (in Wisconsin), and those plants often have the ability to recover from these stresses.”

Running The Corn Replant Math

To frame the replant decision, Kaur walks through a replant return-on-investment scenario for a southern Wisconsin field that was planted May 5 with a full-season 113-day hybrid.

Extension corn specialist Harkirat Kaur shared this example of when replanting would deliver more ROI than sticking with the existing crop. The decision to replant would make sense, depending on how many acres would be able to deliver this financial advantage.

(Harkirat Kaur)

In her example, a stress event drops the stand from a target of 34,000 plants to around 18,000 — roughly 60% to 65% of the original population. That moves expected yield from about 215 bushels per acre to a range of 130 to 160 bushels, or roughly $602 per acre in gross income at current price assumptions.

Replanting later in May means giving up some yield potential to fewer heat units, but it may still pencil out.

“With replanting, the yield potential comes down to about 80% to 85%, which brings the number to approximately around 180 bushels per acre,” she says. “Then we need to account for the replant cost — the cost for new seed, the cost for your fuel, and the time that you’re spending.”

In her example, even after those expenses, the net return on replanting comes out ahead.

“That would bring us to a net of around $675 per acre,” Kaur says. “We are having anywhere around a net advantage of replanting of about $70 to $72 per acre, which could be a bigger number when we are looking at hundreds of acres.”

Still, she frames replant as a decision of last resort.

“Replanting only when the ROI is likely to be positive is critical,” she says. “Keeping ROI over all the operation in mind is the No. 1 thing.”

Nitrogen, Natural Gas And Timing

Kaur also links replant timing to nitrogen management and volatile natural gas markets.

“Natural gas is very critical for agricultural production, because it drives the production of our nitrogen fertilizers,” she says. “When we are looking at overall gas price instability, it reflects in our agricultural cost anywhere between two to eight weeks when it is happening at the global scale.”

Before deciding to replant, she urges farmers to know where they stand on nitrogen availability.

“We need to ensure how much nitrogen is already in the ground and how much nitrogen is still available to be used for the crops,” she says. “Doing another soil analysis might be of use. It might help save the cost of applying more nitrogen, or also putting in hours of applying that fertilizer.”

Kaur says split nitrogen application strategies become more valuable in a tough economic year like this.

“Protecting existing nitrogen investment is critical,” she says. “If you (can), plan for a sidedress. Then replanting before the sidedress is something that can help you save some of your time and also some of your money.”

For Soybeans, ‘Don’t Change Anything’ — Except Row Width

On the soybean side, Shawn Conley, Extension soybean and small grains specialist at the University of Wisconsin, offers his take on next steps at this point in the season.

“In short, basically, don’t change anything except maybe narrow your soybean rows up if you can,” he says. “

Most of his university research plots across Wisconsin are already planted, though some beans are still sitting in dry soil waiting on a rain.

Conley adds that he expects Wisconsin farmers to plant roughly a half-million more soybean acres in 2026 than they did in 2025, based on current projections and spring conditions.

Prioritize Corn Now, Finish Beans After

For growers juggling both crops, Conley says the yield penalty curve has flipped solidly in favor of corn.

“At this time of the growing season, where we are sitting in May, we’re really in this significant decline in yield penalty for delayed planting in corn versus where we are with soybean,” he explains.

“We’re obviously losing yield by delaying soybean planting, too, but not to the extent that we are with corn,” he adds. “It pains me to say, and I tweeted this out last week — it’s time to prioritize corn planting, if possible, if the ground is fit.”

His message to farmers: get corn wrapped up, then come back and finish soybeans.

Seeding Rate And Replant Thresholds

Conley does not see a need to bump soybean seeding rates for now, even with cooler conditions.

His economic analysis shows little payoff to cutting rates aggressively at this point, once seed cost and yield are both considered.

Optimal seeding rate for planting would be 100,000 seeds per acre, even in mid-May, according to Shawn Conley. “But, that really doesn’t take into effect delayed canopy and management of waterhemp,” he notes. For replanting considerations, Conley says he tells farmers that unless they have under 60,000 plants per acre and actively growing, his advice is “don’t do anything.”

(Shawn Conley)

“Optimal seeding rate would be 100,000 seeds per acre, even in this May 13 timeframe,” he notes. “But, that really doesn’t take into effect delayed canopy and management of waterhemp.”

In high weed pressure, Conley says most farmers should stay with about 140,000 seeds per acre unless they have a “very strong weed management plan on the waterhemp.”

On replant decisions, his threshold is clear.

“Generally, what we tell farmers is that unless you have under 60,000 plants per acre and actively growing, don’t do anything,” Conley says. “Don’t even touch that crop.”

If stands fall below that mark, he recommends what he calls a repair plant, not a full reset.

“If it is under 60,000, just do a repair plant, which means you don’t start over from scratch,” he says. “You just go into that field, set the planter at an angle so as not to run over or disturb any of those existing growing plants, and then just plant into your existing stand.”

“The population that’s in the field right now has a higher yield potential than anything you’d be putting in the ground today,” he adds.

Consider Row Spacing

Row spacing is the one area where Conley does advise a change for mid-May and later planting — when farmers have the equipment to do it.

“As our yields have increased due to earlier planting, the yield difference between wide rows and narrow rows shrank,” he says. “However, as we get into lower yield potential — i.e., later planting — then we see those yield differences still remain.”

That shows up particularly in 30-inch rows planted in mid-May and later.

“The longer it takes from planting date to when those soybeans hit R3, the smaller the yield difference between row spacings,” he explains. “Because we’re delayed planting, the number of days between when you plant today and when you get to R3 is going to be in that 50- to 60-day range. You’re going to see a yield penalty if you stick with the 30-inch rows.”

“If you have the capacity — you still have a 15-inch row planter and you maybe haven’t been utilizing that — I think you need to be able to break that out and use that for finishing off your soybean planting,” he says.

Rethink Your Herbicide Strategy In High-Residue Systems

Wed, 13 May 2026 17:24:45 GMT

Waterhemp and other tough weeds are forcing farmers to rethink how they use herbicides in high-residue cropping systems, from heavy corn stalks to thick cereal rye covers.

Extension weed scientists say they increasingly hear from growers who did “everything right” with applying their preemergence products yet still see waterhemp push through and survive. Increasingly, one of the challenges is those fields carry a lot more residue than they used to.

“Every year, we have some situations where we get less than expected control of weeds for various reasons, and I’ve come around to appreciate the impact that residue can have on our success,” says Tom Peters, Extension agronomist and weed control specialist for North Dakota State University and the University of Minnesota.

Oftentimes, the assumption has been that rainfall will wash herbicides off the residue and down into the soil, where they can do their job. Peters says that belief does not hold up in reality.

“I would argue that some of our performance challenges have been related to those herbicides sticking to the residues,” contends Peters, who made his comments during the 2026 Field Notes program.

That problem is on the increase as farmers are dialing back their tillage passes, planting into more corn and soybean residue and seeding more cover crops.

Reduction In Control Assessed

During graduate work with the University of Minnesota, Eric Yu, now a regional crops Extension educator, measured just how much product residue can intercept herbicides. In cover crop plots, he and his colleagues placed water-sensitive cards below cereal rye crops, applied a preemergence herbicide and then evaluated the results.

“We were seeing about a 50% reduction in the amount of product that reaches the soil compared to our control plots,” Yu says. “Yet despite that 50% reduction, we were seeing still significant weed control, specifically waterhemp control.”

The message, Yu says, is not that residue makes the use of pre products pointless. It is that farmers need to account for residue when they design their weed-control programs — and still keep a strong preemergence herbicide in the plan.

Peters agrees. Even when residue cuts the amount of product reaching the soil, pres are still the foundation of a good program, especially as waterhemp increases in resistance to postemergence herbicides.

“Start the season with pre products, observe your results and then decide what the best postemergence program is,” he advises.

For farmers managing crops in high-residue systems, Peters and Yu point to several practical steps:

Prioritize Soil Contact: Ensure herbicides are actually reaching the soil surface. In cases of extreme residue, it may be necessary to manage or move stalks and straw ahead of planting.
Adjust Product and Rate: Work with agronomists to select products and rates that can withstand some interception while still delivering enough active ingredient to the soil to be effective. Using full labeled rates is increasingly a best-practice solution for control and to reduce selection pressure for further herbicide resistance.
Tighten the Timing Window: Because residue can blunt the effectiveness of a pre product, escapes are more likely. Small waterhemp is much easier to control; once the weed reaches the 4- to 5-inch range, control becomes significantly more difficult.

Researchers Evaluate 21 Herbicides

A group of University of Wisconsin-Madison scientists recently studied which herbicides make it to the ground and provide residual waterhemp control in high-residue farming systems. The controlled-environment study evaluated 21 single-active-ingredient corn and/or soybean herbicides compatible with high-biomass cereal rye. Here are the results, courtesy of GROW :

Corn herbicides identified as effective for waterhemp control and compatible with high-biomass cereal rye in this study included:

Acetochlor (Harness – Group 15)
Dimethenamid-P (Outlook – Group 15)
Pyroxasulfone (Zidua – Group 15)
S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum – Group 15)
Atrazine (Group 5)*
Isoxaflutole (Balance Flexx – Group 27)
Mesotrione (Callisto – Group 27)

*waterhemp population used in this study is still susceptible to atrazine applied preemergence.

Soybean herbicides identified as effective for waterhemp control and compatible with high-biomass cereal rye in this study included:

Dimethenamid-P (Outlook – Group 15)
Pyroxasulfone (Zidua – Group 15)
S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum – Group 15)
Flumioxazin (Valor – Group 14)
Fomesafen (Flexstar – Group 14)
Metribuzin (Group 5)

The Wisconsin researchers say soybean growers should pay close attention to application timing restrictions. Flumioxazin-containing products for instance must be applied within three days of soybean planting, while metribuzin must be applied prior to soybean emergence. The remaining soybean herbicides listed above can be applied preemergence or early postemergence, offering flexibility for growers who plant early and delay cereal rye termination until after soybean emergence.

A standard program in planting green systems where the cereal rye is terminated after soybean emergence may include glyphosate for cereal rye termination, combined with soil residual herbicides fomesafen plus a Group 15 herbicide (e.g., pyroxasulfone, S-metolachlor, or dimethenamid-P) and a Group 2 herbicide such as imazethapyr (Pursuit), cloransulam (FirstRate), or chlorimuron (Classic) for broad spectrum weed control.

Why High GDUs Aren’t Guaranteeing Quick Emergence This Year

Tue, 12 May 2026 20:35:28 GMT

While farmers keep a close eye on the thermometer and their favorite weather app during planting season, Phil Long says the most important metric right now might be the one they can’t see: the temperature beneath the soil surface.

Long, a regional agronomist with Liqui-Grow, says growers in north-central Iowa are reporting sluggish emergence for corn and soybeans. That’s despite the fact the region accumulated roughly 197 Growing Degree Units (GDUs) from April 10 to May 1, outpacing the 30-year average of 121 GDUs.

“It takes about 130 or so GDUs to get corn or beans out of the ground,” says Iowa-based Long. “So why aren’t more crops emerged?”

The discrepancy, he contends, lies in the difference between air GDUs and soil GDUs. While air temperatures are important, seed reacts almost totally to the heat of the soil surrounding it. For a seed to germinate and push through the soil surface, it requires consistent warmth that hasn’t materialized during recent chilly conditions in some areas.

“What’s most important to the corn and beans out there in the ground is soil GDUs,” Long says. “Even corn up to V6 is regulated primarily off the heat in the ground.”

Why Some Crops Have ‘Just Sat There’

The formula for calculating GDUs relies on a base temperature of 50 degrees Fahrenheit and a ceiling of 86 degrees. When nighttime temperatures dip into the 30s, as they have recently in Iowa and parts of the Eastern Corn Belt, the soil temperature can linger in the 40s and 50s. At those levels, the “heat engine” for the seed essentially stalls.

“We’re not getting that soil temperature up there very far,” Long explains. “That does not stack up GDUs very quickly.”

Long notes that along with the chilly weather conditions, two additional factors can act as “buffers” against soil warming: crop residue and cloud cover.

While heavy residue is often a benefit in the heat of July, it can act as an insulator in the spring, preventing the sun from reaching the soil. In some cases, high-residue fields can see a 50% reduction in GDU accumulation compared to conventionally tilled ground, Long notes.

Furthermore, a stretch of overcast days will rob the soil of solar radiation.

“If there’s heavy cloud cover, that can reduce solar radiation by 80%,” Long says. He explains that even on a cool 55-degree day, direct sunlight can push soil temperatures much higher. But persistent clouds have kept the ground locked in a cool cycle.

As planting continues into the heart of May, Long advises farmers to look beyond the air temperature and keep in mind the micro-climate of the seedbed as they plant.

“Although we’re ahead in terms of air temperature GDUs for this year compared to the ‘average’ year, we’re probably behind in terms of those seeds sitting in the ground,” Long says. “That soil GDU is a big factor when it comes to getting crops out of the ground.”

Soybean Gall Midge Emerges As Top-Tier Threat

Mon, 11 May 2026 20:19:27 GMT

Soybean gall midge is no longer just a curiosity or annoyance for many Midwest farmers. The pest is chewing into yield and profitability for soybean growers across parts of at least seven states – Kansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota.

Iowa State University Entomologist Erin Hodgson reports the pest’s footprint is significant, present in at least 42% of the 45.4 million acres of soybeans farmers harvested across the seven states in 2025.

“At least 19 million soybean acres are potentially impacted by this pest,” Hodgson says, noting that the pest continues to spread. Eight new counties were confirmed in 2025, with five of those being in Iowa .

According to a recent farmer survey led by University of Nebraska Entomologist Doug Golick, the pest has become a major threat in parts of Nebraska. “In the last year or two, soybean gall midge is approaching as near high of concern as herbicide-resistant weeds for survey respondents,” Golick says.

Since 2018, the soybean gall midge has spread to 185 total counties in seven states, including five new counties in Iowa this past year, according to Erin Hodgson, Iowa State University Extension entomologist and professor.

(Erin Hodgson)

Look For Small Orange Or White Larvae

Damage from the insect starts at the base of the soybean plants, largely out of sight. Adult midges emerge from the ground in May and June, then seek out tiny fissures in young soybean plants near the soil line to lay eggs, according to Thales Rodrigues da Silva, a master’s student at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln.

The larvae cause severe, localized yield losses from 20% to 100% loss along field edges and 17% to 50% reductions in entire fields average under heavy infestation, according to University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) Extension. The larvae – small, orange worm-like pests – feed inside the base of the stem, causing plants to wither, die, and lodge (break), with damages sometimes extending 100+ feet into fields. Scouting for the pest should occur after the second trifoliate (V2) growth stage, according to the Crop Protection Network.

This damage in a soybean plant at the soil level shows the result of soybean gall midge larvae feeding.

(University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension)

Because the pest often feeds along field edges, the damage in affected plants is often mistaken for issues caused by compaction or herbicide injury, according to Stine Seed Company .

To confirm the pest’s presence, Stine agronomists recommend digging up compromised soybean plants and splitting open the stem. If white or orange larvae are found feeding within the inner layers, growers should check the Soybean Gall Midge Alert Network tracking system to determine whether the pest has been reported in their area. Next, they should contact their local Extension specialist to help confirm the diagnosis and report the finding if their county is not yet documented in their area.

Cultural Practices Show Promise

Unfortunately, there are few strategies to manage and control soybean gall midge, according to Tony Lenz, Stine technical agronomist.
With no labeled, consistently effective in-season insecticide program and no established treatment threshold, researchers are testing cultural and mechanical tactics that might give farmers at least partial relief.

Tillage ahead of planting — a tough sell in no-till systems — shows some promise in reducing early infestations in current-year soybean fields.

“Turns out that disking alone, at least in (our) study… did reduce infestation,” says Justin McMechan an entomologist and associate professor at UNL.

“There’s a significant reduction as we move from no-till to that… where it’s just disked and planted into, and then disking and hilling (a practice used in growing potatoes), which really is effective, because you’re covering up the infestation site,” McMechan adds.

He notes that even subtle changes in seedbed shape may help by covering fissures or altering microclimates at the stem base.

On planters running row cleaners, McMechan says adjustments at field edges might be one of the more accessible tools.

“There are not huge differences, but they are statistically significant,” he adds.

Field edge management has been another area of experimentation, including mowing or managing dense vegetation next to infested fields. Results are mixed, but McMechan says there are situations where mowing modestly cuts pressure.

“Nebraska saw on occasion where mowing would reduce infestation and lead to marginal yield benefit… we’re talking like 6-bushel differences,” he says, adding that weather and nearby corn canopy can override those gains.

There are no insecticides currently available to control soybean gall midge. A combination of cultural practices and mechanical efforts is likely the best option, for now, to stop or slow the pest.

(Justin McMechan)

Scientists Evaluate ‘Out-Of-The-Box’ Practices

Other work by researchers is pushing even further outside the box to find control measures. At UNL, graduate research assistant Kristin Heinrichs Stark is testing whether a biodegradable surface barrier called BioWrap can physically trap larvae in the soil and prevent emergence.

The work is early-stage and raises reasonable questions about cost and field-scale application rates, but it points to the kind of layered, non-chemical tactics Extension researchers say will likely be needed to address the pest.

Even as these cultural and physical strategies are developed, Hodgson reminds farmers that the ag industry still lacks any clear control option once larvae are inside the soybean stem.

“We really don’t have a treatment threshold, or a rescue treatment option at this time,” she says. “We know that the soybean gall midge certainly can cause yield losses, plant death, and that directly relates to yield. But we don’t really have great answers on like, how many plants does it take? How many larvae per plant (causes yield loss)?”

For now, farmers dealing with soybean gall midge are being asked to combine careful field scouting, crop rotation, and targeted cultural tactics to address the pest as the research community races to find answers and close those gaps.

Specialists from three Midwest universities provided the latest updates on soybean gall midge (SGM) this spring in a webinar, available at the link below:

Are Your Fields A Green Light? Use the Three-Factor System To Guide Planting Decisions

Fri, 08 May 2026 16:52:22 GMT

Farm Journal Field Agronomist Ken Ferrie is urging farmers to pay close attention to soil conditions and local weather forecasts as planting accelerates across the Midwest.

Ferrie and his team at Crop-Tech Consulting recommend using a “red-yellow-green light” system to guide planting decisions. The practice is based on three factors: soil moisture, seed chilling risks and the 10-day emergence forecast.

The information on the green-yellow-red color system for planting is pretty self-explanatory, says Ken Ferrie. Once you know the light color, you can see the meaning and the action he recommends taking.

(Crop-Tech Consulting)

Regional Forecast And Recommendation

Despite ongoing weather struggles from cold and rain in some parts of the country, planting progress continues across much of the upper Midwest.

For central Illinois, Ferrie says there is a green light for Monday, with some areas getting a yellow or red light for Tuesday. The U.S. National Weather Service says a weak cold front will bring the next chance for storms later on Tuesday, some of which could be severe. Temperatures will turn cooler for midweek.

Ferrie warns that the first 12 to 24 hours seed corn is in the ground are the most critical. During this window of time, the seed absorbs 30% of its weight in water. If that water is below 50 degrees Fahrenheit, the cells lose elasticity and tear. Chilled seed corn can easily result in a 10% stand loss.

“You can literally tell the difference between fields that were planted in the morning compared to in an afternoon that’s going into a cool night,” Ferrie says. “That is why you’ll see our lights change at noon some days, trying to get enough water absorbed before the soil temperature drops.”

You can get more information from Ferrie on the perils of seed corn chilling in this brief video:

Ferrie says if corn takes longer than 11 days to emerge, those kernels that were planted “spike down” will struggle to compete.

“The spike-down plants can be a week or two weeks behind the spike-up plants,” Ferrie explains. “At that point, they will be more than a collar behind and not produce a regular-sized ear.”

Listen to Ferrie’s complete recommendations in his Boots In The Field podcast:

Metabolic Weed Resistance Crisis Builds Across The Heartland

Wed, 06 May 2026 16:51:05 GMT

Waterhemp, Palmer amaranth and some other tough broadleaf weeds and grasses are no longer slipping past just single herbicides. Across the Corn Belt and beyond, they are tolerating entire herbicide programs. Weed scientists say that pattern points to a critical issue more farmers are facing: metabolic resistance.

Unlike traditional target-site resistance, which is often specific to a single herbicide class, metabolic resistance is even worse because it can confer cross-resistance to multiple, unrelated herbicide groups .

Aaron Hager, University of Illinois Extension weed scientist often warns that when a tough weed like waterhemp learns to metabolize one herbicide, it becomes easier for it to “learn” to detoxify others. That ability has helped lead to the 7-way resistance with waterhemp seen in some Illinois counties, according to weed scientist Patrick Tranel, one of Hager’s colleagues.

At least 13 states have reported having some degree of “highly suspected” or confirmed cases of metabolic weed resistance. Here are three of the broadleaf weeds demonstrating metabolic resistance and states where they’re located:

Along with these broadleaf weeds, some common and giant ragweed, marestail/horseweed, annual (Italian) ryegrass and barnyardgrass populations have also demonstrated metabolic resistance.

(Weed Science Society of America, GROW, BASF, Syngenta)

Target-site resistance can be identified through DNA tests. But metabolic resistance is a “guessing game” involving potentially dozens to hundreds of genes working in tandem, making it difficult for scientists and farmers to know which products will still work in their specific fields.

Tommy Butts sees the trend for metabolic resistance taking root in Indiana. He says HPPD resistance in waterhemp is “getting widespread,” and the failures are expanding to other chemistries as well.

“We had more complaints last year about things like mesotrione or Callisto starting to fail, which is really scary in the corn acres,” says Butts, Purdue University Extension weed scientist. “Corn is supposed to be our easy year to control waterhemp, and now, all of a sudden, we start losing Callisto.” He addresses this in detail in the latest Purdue Crop Chat .

The bad news does not stop there.

“You start talking auxins and glufosinate, and we have confirmed resistance in the state to those,” he says. “I wouldn’t say that’s as widespread, but it’s definitely popping up.”

With metabolic resistance chipping away at PPOs, HPPDs, atrazine partners, auxins and glufosinate, the old playbook of “just switch products” no longer works well.

Glufosinate alone 😀⁰Mesotrione alone 😕⁰Glufosinate + mesotrione 🔥😎

That’s the power of effective herbicide tank mixtures.

Deploying synergistic tank mixes with multiple effective sites of action is critical for improving weed control and helping delay herbicide resistance… pic.twitter.com/FggZJrQQ1Q
— Rodrigo Werle (@WiscWeeds) May 6, 2026

“Hammer With Residuals” And Build Effective Combinations

Butts’ first message to corn and soybean farmers is straightforward: no more solo herbicide passes in the field.

“We have to hammer weeds with effective residuals and then mix up our posts as much as possible,” he says.

In his view, that means at least two things for row-crop growers. First, use layered residual programs that keep fields clean as long as possible and reduce the number of emerged weeds that ever see a post pass. Second, use post-emerge applications that combine multiple, truly effective modes of action at full labeled rates.

Cutting rates, he warns, is exactly how growers “train” metabolism-based resistance to take root.

With soybean trait systems, he pushes hard against relying on a single flagship product.

“If we’re growing Enlist soybeans, don’t just rely on Enlist and don’t just rely on Liberty,” Butts advises. “Do the tank mix. The tank mix trumps everything.”

This field shows the result of waterhemp seeds that were spread during harvest by a combine.

(Aaron Hager, University of Illinois)

Pay More Up Front To Avoid Making Expensive “Revenge Sprays”

Metabolic resistance can thrive when weeds are hit with chemistry they can partially tolerate. That is why Butts keeps coming back to strong, early, soil-applied programs.

He hears pushback from farmers every year on using multiple products in the tank.

“A lot of people tell me, ‘Well, it costs way too much up front with $20 for a pre. Corn gets even more expensive,’” he acknowledges.
However, Butts points to work by Purdue University Extension and other states showing those dollars pay off when the entire season is measured.

“If you can get a strong residual program out and get it activated, the whole-season economics of it makes sense,” Butts says. “It’s consistently shown that if you have that strong pre up front, you don’t have what I like to call the revenge sprays in August, where we’re going across the field three different times trying to kill waist-high waterhemp.”

Check out this tool from GROW on how to address waterhemp specifically.

Protect Herbicide Tools To Extend Their Use

As more herbicide modes of action come under pressure, Butts singles out metribuzin as an example of a product that still pulls its weight in soybeans.

“Metribuzin is a big one in soybeans, because we don’t have a lot of resistance to that,” he says.

“I will also put in the plug for AMS in general, across the board,” Butts says. “That always helps with some of those products… when we start getting later in the season, we get more stressed weeds. AMS even tends to help there.”

Butts does caution farmers that AMS is not allowed in dicamba tank mixes for XtendFlex soybeans.

Underlying all of it is a blunt warning about what happens if growers decide to skimp on their weed control efforts.

“If you let it go even one year, now you’ve made yourself a mess for the next five to 10 years,” he says. “You’ve got to try and stay on top of weeds as much as possible.”

5 Practical Recommendations To Address Metabolic Resistance

Because metabolic resistance is so unpredictable, weed scientists have shifted their advice away from “rotating chemicals” toward a “zero-threshold” approach to control. The following metabolic resistance management recommendations have been presented by Aaron Hager, University of Illinois Weed Scientist, and Beck’s agronomists:

1. The primary focus of metabolic resistance management should be on decreasing the weed seed bank. This means that weeds must be eliminated before they ever go to seed.

2. A robust residual herbicide program should be used, not because residuals represent a different herbicide family but because they eliminate weeds at the earliest growth stages – slashing contributions to the weed seed bank.

3. Physically cutting weeds out of the crop must be included in the management plan, because physical elimination of weed escapes further slashes contributions to the weed seed bank.

4. Post-herbicide programs should shift from calendar-based timing to scouting-based timing. Once weeds break through a pre-emerge residual program, they must be eliminated. Such early targeting further slashes contributions to the weed seed bank.

5. Mechanical techniques, field cultivators, etc., should be used where possible to further the cause of decreased seed production.

Build A High-Yield Powerhouse From The Bottom Up

Tue, 05 May 2026 17:40:53 GMT

The planter monitor in your tractor cab insists the seed corn is tucked away at a 2.5-inch planting depth, but Randy Dowdy says to question that placement. The high-yield row-crop grower explains there is often a difference between what the planter monitor says and what the soil shows — and the gap between the two can rob farmers of yield potential before the crop ever breaks the soil surface.

“You have to distinguish between the planting depth and what we call the germination depth. It’s a potential problem we talk about all the time with our farmers in Total Acre ,” says Dowdy of his agronomic business he co-owns with David Hula, world champion corn grower.

Iowa State Extension defines planting depth as the placement of the seed corn in the soil, while germination depth (emergence) is where the corn nodal roots will form, regardless of the planting depth.

The discrepancy that can occur between the planting depth and germination depth often happens at the moment the seed trench is closed or shortly thereafter. The planter might place the seed at 2.5 inches, but the closing system can shift seed upward — especially in dry, loose soils. As the dirt settles the seed can end up germinating at a significantly shallower depth than the grower intended.

“When we check seed placement in an open furrow, there’s no doubt about it, we were planting at 2.5 inches,” Dowdy notes in a recent video. But as he moves behind the machine to inspect the closed row, the reality changes. In Dowdy’s field demonstration, the shift is dramatic, showing the seed is now sitting much closer to the soil surface.

“When we dig into that closed trench, we find that the seed is now sitting in the ground at about 1.5 inches to 1.75 inches, and that’s not what you want,” Dowdy says. Watch the video on Farm Journal TV .

The result of that shallow germination depth is a fundamental threat to corn, Iowa State Extension reports. Shallow germination can impact early root development and contribute to rootless corn syndrome, susceptibility to herbicide injury, poor drought tolerance and other issues that can impact growth and development throughout the season and, ultimately, reduce yield.

(Farm Journal TV)

To combat this, Dowdy’s philosophy is simple: trust what you learn using a shovel to dig behind the planter to locate the seed; don’t depend only on what the planter monitor in the tractor cab shows.

Dowdy and Hula advocate for establishing a consistent germination depth for seed corn across the field, ensuring that plants have the strong foundation they need to thrive.

“For proper root development, we like to maintain a consistent two-inch germination depth,” advises Dowdy, who’s based near Valdosta, Ga.

Dan Quinn, Purdue University Extension corn specialist, says the “most common seeding depths recommended for corn range between 1.5 and 2 inches deep, and these planting depths can work very well within most conditions, however, certain soil moisture conditions at planting may warrant further examination/change in seeding depth.”

This year, with dry soil conditions in the Southeast, farmers have had difficulty achieving a 2-inch planting depth consistently for good emergence. Dowdy’s directive to growers in dry ground is to account for the “settle” in soils at planting by adjusting planter settings to go a bit deeper with planting.

Iowa State Extension agrees, noting that a 3-inch depth is usually OK in drier soils. While deeper planting can take slightly longer to emerge, it can lead to more uniform stands compared to shallow planting.

“My advice in these (dry) conditions is to plant a bit deeper, knowing the ground will settle, and you’ll get better root development,” Dowdy says.

By prioritizing the physical reality of the seedbed over the digital feedback in the cab, Dowdy believes farmers can unlock better performance without any additional overhead. By doing so, growers “will do a better job, and you’ll have proper root development and help you on your yields for free,” he says.

You can hear more about how this season is shaping up for Dowdy and Hula on their latest edition of Breaking Barriers With R&D podcast with Chip Flory on AgriTalk. Listen at the link below:

50 Years of Trust: How Marion Ag Service Navigates the Future of Independent Ag Retail

Tue, 05 May 2026 15:35:25 GMT

John Hockett, CEO of Marion Ag Service, is the second-generation leader for this family-run ag retailer located in Oregon. As a previous recipient of ARA’s Retailer of the Year, Marion Ag Service exemplifies excellence in its business in many ways, which Hockett boils down to “little things matter.” This year marks 50 years of business, and on The Scoop Podcast Hockett shares a bit on their vision for the next 50.

Trust-Driven Service

Hockett emphasizes that the foundation of Marion Ag Service is built on listening to growers and solving their specific problems. The retailer serves a wide range of customers, from row crop and specialty crop growers, to nurseries, turf managers, and distributor partners within the 11 western states.

“Marion Ag was built on listening to growers and solving real problems, not just selling products. And that mindset hasn’t changed in 50 years,” he says.

He describes their “trust-driven” approach as being willing to “jump through almost any hoop” to ensure customer needs are met with speed and accuracy.

The Power of Independence

A major theme is the flexibility afforded by being a family-owned, independent retailer. Hockett notes that this allows them to make local decisions quickly and maintain accountability to their community without answering to corporate mandates or outside shareholders.

“Independence gives us the speed and flexibility, along with accountability to our community. Simply put, we care,” he says.

Culture and People Over Infrastructure

While the company has invested in modern facilities, Hockett insists that the “people inside” are the true differentiator.

His role as CEO began in 2022, and he’s worked at the company for over three decades.

“My role is really to protect our culture, and focus on long-term relationships, and position the business for sustainable growth while staying grounded in the needs of our growers. And even as we’ve grown, we’re still very hands-on and customer-driven,” he says.

He highlights the importance of protecting the company culture and investing in the next generation of leaders through coaching and succession planning.

“We’re still family-owned,” he says. “And we’re developing the next generation of leaders.”

Strategic Focus and Adaptation

The company has evolved from a local feed and supply business to a major nutrient delivery and technical service provider. This includes the disciplined decision to move away from non-core segments, like feed manufacturing, to focus on their strengths in fertilizer and soil health.

In the podcast episode he discussed in detail that decision to move on from the feed mill and his own entrance into the company and leadership roles.

Navigating Complexity as an Opportunity

Hockett identifies market volatility, rising input costs, and increasing regulations as the industry’s biggest challenges. However, he views these as Marion Ag’s greatest opportunities to provide value as a trusted partner helping growers stay profitable and efficient.

“We value all customers, and so even if it’s a one 50-pound bag of fertilizer, or it could be 10 truckloads, it’s important that we get it right, and that we’re on time,” he says. “Growers need trusted partners to help them navigate regulations and use inputs more efficiently, improve soil health, and stay profitable. And those are areas where Marion Ag is deeply invested and well-positioned.

GreenPoint Ag’s First CEO Departs

Tue, 05 May 2026 14:32:48 GMT

Via a LinkedIn post, Jeff Blair provides a candid and personal reflection on the conclusion of his tenure as President and CEO of GreenPoint Ag. The piece marks a significant leadership transition for one of the largest agricultural retail entities in the United States.

From the post titled, “So it ends.,” Blair wrote, “My professional passion in life is building and leading great teams. There simply is nothing better than helping the people around you grow and thrive, of being part of a team working together towards a common goal. Thank you for the opportunity and the trust you showed me in letting me build the kind of company I had dreamed of working for. GreenPoint is still wet clay but all great companies stay mouldable. It was the job of a lifetime and I will always be grateful.”

His departure signals a period of transition for GreenPoint Ag. Founded in September 2020, GreenPoint Ag formed a new $1 billion agronomy business venture combining Agri-AFC, GreenPoint AG, and Tennessee Farmers Cooperative. Its nearly 100 ag retail and wholesale locations span 11 states from Georgia to Texas.

The board has begun as “expedited” search process for the company’s CEO.

For the interim, GreenPoint Ag communicated internally that the board has named Joey Caldwell to serve as interim CEO in addition to his current role serving as CEO for Tennessee Farmers Cooperative. Caldwell will not be a candidate for the permanent role at GreenPoint Ag.

From the company’s statement: “GreenPoint remains focused on executing its business plans, supporting its customers and members, and positioning the organization for continued, long-term success.”

EPA Opens Public Comment Period On Draft Fungicide Strategy

Mon, 04 May 2026 16:20:14 GMT

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is offering the U.S. public an opportunity to help shape the future of agricultural safety, unveiling a draft Fungicide Strategy designed to balance the needs of American farmers with the protection of the nation’s most vulnerable wildlife.

The proposal marks a significant step in the agency’s effort to meet its dual mandates under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). By creating a more efficient and transparent framework for pesticide registration, the EPA says it aims to “safeguard more than 1,000 federally endangered and threatened species” while ensuring growers maintain the tools necessary to protect the nation’s food supply.

A New Framework for Modern Farming

The draft strategy focuses on conventional agricultural fungicides across the lower 48 states — an area covering approximately 41 million treated acres annually. Rather than a one-size-fits-all mandate, the proposal introduces a three-step framework:

Identify Impacts: Assessing potential population-level effects on listed species.
Mitigation Planning: Pinpointing specific measures to reduce those risks.
Targeted Application: Determining exactly where these protections are most needed based on where endangered and threatened species live and how fungicides move through the environment.

The agency emphasizes that while this strategy guides future regulatory actions, it does not impose immediate requirements. Instead, the strategy serves as a roadmap for upcoming registration reviews, with the EPA promising public input on every specific action before it is finalized.

Balancing Innovation and Conservation

Saying that it recognizes farmers are the backbone of the U.S. economy, the EPA’s draft includes several updates to provide greater flexibility. Notably, the plan expands options for reducing spray drift buffer distances and introduces new mitigation tools, such as the use of “guar gum” as a spray adjuvant.

"[American farmers] need a diverse toolbox of innovative agricultural technologies to manage crop disease, prevent resistance, and produce the affordable, nutritious food that feeds our country,” the EPA says, in a press release. “The draft Fungicide Strategy is designed to ensure those innovative tools remain available and that they are used in ways that protect the environment and endangered species.

How to Get Involved

In a push for transparency, the EPA has opened a 60-day public comment period to gather feedback from scientists, conservationists, Tribal partners and the agricultural community.

Public Comment: Stakeholders can review the strategy and submit formal feedback via (Docket: EPA-HQ-OPP-2026-2973) through June 29, 2026.
Informational Webinar: The agency will host a public webinar on May 20, 2026, at 2 p.m. ET to walk through the proposal and answer questions. Register here .

The EPA expects to review all public input and finalize the Fungicide Strategy by November 2026.

Simplify Nitrogen Management and Protect Precious Fertilizer Investments

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 17:30:49 GMT

Managing nitrogen is complicated. With run-off, leaching, volatilization, and missed timing due to weather and equipment breakdowns, around 30% of applied nitrogen can be lost, or, in other words, wasted. Add in high fertilizer costs and low commodity prices, and retailers and growers are feeling the pressure to protect their precious fertilizer investments more than ever.

Better Nitrogen. Better Intake.
Growers deserve a better solution to simplify nitrogen programs, and that solution is alignN®, an intelligent foliar nitrogen tool that can be easily incorporated into a successful fertility strategy. It is a precisely formulated encapsulated urea molecule that delivers nitrogen when and where it’s needed most—directly on and into the leaf. This level of precision innovation with nitrogen means that alignN® can help growers optimize the overall effectiveness of their fertility programs.

And if you were wondering if alignN® complicates on-farm logistics, there’s no need to worry. It’s compatible with most existing nitrogen programs, herbicides, fungicides, and other nutritional inputs, and can be applied via ground, aerial, and drone. This ease of use allows growers to spoon feed nitrogen all season long, matching the crop’s growth and nitrogen demand curves.

(The Tidal Grow AgriScience Team)

Better Yields.
alignN® takes the biggest pain points growers face (inefficiency, logistics, and cost) and overcomes them with a tool that’s flexible, proven, and easy to integrate into existing programs. Check out the results achieved from 10,000 acres of large-scale grower trials that offered average yield bumps of +7 bushels per acre and over $18 per acre net returns.

(The Tidal Grow AgriScience Team)

Are you ready to learn how alignN® can simplify your nitrogen management and boost yield potential? Visit our website to learn more .

¹_{No nitrogen reduced from growers’ current program. alignN® added into current program.}
²_{40 Ibs. N/A reduced from growers’ pre-or at-plant standard program + alignN® included.}
³_{20 Ibs. N/A reduced from growers’ pre-or at-plant standard program + alignN® included.}

_{About the Author}
_{Trey Cutts, V.P. of Commercial Agriculture Science at Tidal Grow AgriScience, has enjoyed a diverse career in the agriculture industry spanning both public and private roles within North America and overseas. He is passionate about collaborating with cross-functional teams and external partners to bring technical concepts to commercial reality and facilitate solution impact at scale. Trey received his Ph.D. in Plant Breeding from Texas A&M University, and his M.S. and B.S. degrees in Crop and Soil Science from the University of Georgia.}

Can Biologicals Fill The Gap From Reduced Fertilizer Use?

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 20:04:34 GMT

As thin margins and high fertilizer costs squeeze budgets, many corn and soybean growers are asking a hard question this spring: can biological products help out and pay their way in the field?

The answer depends on the goal, according to Connor Sible, University of Illinois field researcher and associate professor.

“Is the goal to get more out of what we’re already doing, enhance the yield in an already pretty intensive, progressive system?” he asks. “Or, are we trying to reduce inputs and then make up for that by maintaining yields with a biological?”

Sible studies high-yield corn and soybean systems and has spent years looking at how biologicals fit into real-world management. He says profitability hinges on getting a biological and a farming system to match. He offers two trains of thought on reaching a return-on-investment (ROI).

1. The Yield Response: Achieving a direct yield increase to offset the product cost.
2. The Efficiency Response: Improving nutrient uptake to maintain yields while reducing traditional inputs.

That framework for biological use underpinned the discussion during an Illinois Soybean Growers webinar on Tuesday: “Stretching Every Pound: Using Biologicals to Maximize Fertility During Input Shortages.” The program was hosted by the University of Illinois and Valent Biosciences.

Drew Harmon, Valent technical agronomist, provided an overview of row-crop farmers’ persistent struggles with accessing and covering the cost of fertilizer going into the 2026 season. He referenced recent American Farm Bureau and Bushel surveys showing the struggle underway across the Corn Belt and how the strain on farmers is changing their behavior.

(AFBF)

Nearly one-third of farmers Bushel surveyed said they will be doing more to manage costs and inputs this season.

(Bushel, Valent BioSciences)

“A lot of people are considering cutting their fertilizer by about 25%,” Harmon says. He reports that on his own farm, where soil tests are “on the higher end of a maintenance plan,” he and his tenant “decided to cut back our P and K by about a third this year.”

Cutting back fertilizer raises a practical question: how do crops still access enough nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) to perform and meet yield expectations?

One potential answer, Harmon and Sible say, is to use arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, or AMF, especially where phosphorus rates are being reduced.

Harmon explains that mycorrhizal fungi are essentially a beneficial relationship that the fungi have with a host crop such as corn or soybeans. The root system supplies carbon through root exudates and, “in return for that carbon, the mycorrhizal fungi exchange nutrients and water.”

Applied as a seed treatment or in-furrow, AMF spores germinate in response to root exudates and colonize roots, then spread out as fine hyphae – branching, thread-like filaments – through the soil. That network effectively enlarges the rooting zone.

“Utilizing the mycorrhizal hyphae can expand the amount of surface area that [the crop] has to interact with, and it can expand that area by upwards of 50%,” Harmon says. “What that does is increase the opportunities for P and K uptake through diffusion, and it also allows greater access to soil water.”

In fields with lighter soils or facing recurring drought stress, that extended reach can be important. Even as much of the Midwest moves out of formal drought classification, according to the most recent U.S. Drought Monitor, Harmon notes that “we still can get those stretches of heat stress or stretches of flash drought… where we can see strain on our plants for needing water.”

Harmon also lays out an economic example for a typical two-year corn–soybean rotation under a biennial maintenance plan for phosphorus and potassium.

Using removal rates, yield estimates and recent DAP and potash prices, he calculates that a 25% reduction in P and K could offer “savings of mid-$40-ish per acre over a two-year period.”

The cost of using AMF in that scenario, he says, is about $6 per crop or just under $13 per acre over two years.

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi are essentially a beneficial relationship that the fungi have with a host crop such as corn or soybeans. The root system supplies carbon through root exudates and, “in return for that carbon, the mycorrhizal fungi exchange nutrients and water,” according to Drew Harmon, technical services representative for Valent Biosciences.

(Valent)

“AMF can be a potentially economical tool that could help increase nutrient uptake efficiency for the P and K that we’re reducing,” Harmon says, “while still protecting yield and preserving the majority of the fertilizer savings that you were looking to do.”

Harmon and Sible emphasize, however, that biologicals are not replacements for good agronomy—or for basic fertility.

“I don’t know a biological today that will fix a pH,” Sible says, as a for instance. “If we have a pH issue in the system, we probably need to resolve that before we go looking at new practices.”

A similar principle applies to nitrogen. Sible says nitrogen-fixing products can be useful as “a third source” of N, but they do not remove the need for a sound base rate.

“We often see an early-season biomass bump and higher kernel number potential [resulting from the biological product],” he says.

But to turn that into yield, the corn plant must have the nutrient resources to fill ears, which means adequate nitrogen and in-season management such as late fungicide use and/or supplemental nutrients.

For many farmers, another option this season for consideration is organic acids. Such products are positioned as biostimulants that support nutrient use efficiency, improve stress tolerance, and contribute to early growth.

Across both AMF and organic acids, Sible reminds growers that many biologicals are living tools, whether bacteria or fungi, and must be managed that way.

“A happy plant probably indicates happy microbes. Just like we need good conditions for plant growth, we need good conditions for microbial growth,” he says. “Plants need water, microbes need water. Plants need nutrients, microbes need nutrients.”
Harmon offers a similar caution on having the right set of expectations for using a biological.

“These products are not silver bullets,” he says. “They’re not fertilizer. They’re not going to [deliver] crazy amounts of yields. The majority of time you’re seeing it [improve] somewhere around 5% to 7% if you do see a biological response.”

Farm Business In 2026: Relationship First, Digital Convenience Second

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 17:48:22 GMT

Based on the 2026 State of the Farm data, farmers aren’t looking to replace their advisers with algorithms; instead, they want digital tools that remove the friction from the business side of their operation. The State of the Farm Report is prepared by Bushel with the goal of illuminating trends in three things:

Farmer tech use
Payment trends
Supply chain

The most recent survey had 1358 respondents, and here are some of the key takeaways for farmers and agribusiness.

Killing The Trope of The Technology Adverse Farmer

The survey has been conducted since 2018, first by FarmLogs, which was acquired by Bushel. As Julia Eberhart explains, the overall takeaway of the survey from every year has been farmers are not resistant to technology adoption.

“Year after year, we’ve tracked the same data point—farmers’ willingness to adopt tech. And overwhelmingly the data shows farmers are willing to adopt. But we still have this stereotype that agribusiness says farmers won’t use it. And we see across all age groups, we see a willingness to try new technologies,” she says.

Eberhart points to key tenets to pull out from the results in how farmers prefer to do business.

“It’s valuable to both agribusiness and farmers,” she says.

Artificial Intelligence Has Arrived

While in early days of adoption, the survey proves farmer use of AI has broken through with 14% of respondents say they use AI tools on the farm today.

“20% of who said yes, had more than 5,000 acres,” Eberhart says explaining that perhaps larger scale operations are adopting the technology at an earlier pace. Adoption of AI is highest for respondents under 60 years old.

Using AI is an indicator for tech-savvy farmers as 70% of AI users from the study are also “willing to experiment with new technologies,” compared to 42% of the other respondents.

And 11% of respondents say they are unsure, which Eberhart could be a reflection of farmers acknowledging how AI is embedded in much of the software they use but they don’t directly engage with the AI.

What Does This Mean for Ag Service Providers?

Per the State of the Farm, technology enhances but does not replace relationships, interactions, and payments/transactions.

“It’s about how to make doing business easy,” Eberhart says.

She says to win the farmer’s business in 2026, ag retailers must empower their agronomists with tools to build loyalty, offer a mobile or web platform so farmers can easily review prices and quotes on their own time, and provide flexible, integrated financing options alongside traditional check payments.

The Differentiator Lies in the Relationship

In 2025, when Bushel asked “If the price is equal, what is the primary reason you purchase inputs from one retailer over another?”, 52.3% pointed to the “Relationship with staff & overall customer service.” In 2026, that number jumped up 8% to nearly 60%.

If you’re assuming younger farmers only want to interact through screens, the data shows the opposite–85% of farmers under 40 cite the relationship with the staff and overall customer service as their primary reason for choosing a retailer—the highest of any demographic.

Another demographic-driven trend is farms over 2,000 acres show a higher preference for text messaging and digital business. However, farms less than 500 acres show a preference to handle business in person.

In-Person Trust Bridged with Digital Convenience

“Farmers are more willing to share data than they themselves recognize,” Eberhart says. “Year after year, data sharing is rooted in who provides value, what relationship they are having, and who is providing easier ways to be sharing it.”

Farmers are most likely to share data when applying for a loan, with their bankers and accountants, as well as crop insurance providers.

“Those three are by far they are getting the most data sharing for good reason,” Eberhart says.

When it comes to input purchasing and service orders with ag retail, there is a nuanced shift. Farmers still highly value talking to their agronomist, but they want the actual transaction process to be much easier.

Digital Quoting

The end goal of “frictionless business” includes the final checkout. The Bushel research points out while the preference for how a farmer submits their order has remained relatively stable year-over-year, their expectations for what happens before the order has changed.

“Farmers are increasingly adopting digital tools to manage their broader operation, and they are bringing those consumer-level expectations to their retailer,” Eberhart says.

As such, farmers are seeking:

Customized quotes
Product availability transparency
Price comparison tools

And much of that product information available when convenient to them on a portal or a digital storefront.

Support Traditional Payments While Expanding Financing

Eberhart says the State of the Farm has shown how 80% of agribusiness and farmer transaction is done by paper check.

“Over the years, we’ve seen steady growth of digital tools, and reliance on checks being reduced by 1% to 2% every year,” she says.

She says this emphasizes to meet farmers where they are at while simultaneously making it easier for staff to have simplified processes.

Two other financial trends have been in retail supplied financing and farmer credit card use—illustrating how farmers are seeking flexible payment options and new financing or credit programs.

In 2022, over 20% of farmers said they used a credit card to pay for their crop inputs, which fell to 8% in 2024, and then most recently in 2026 2.6% of farmers said they used credit cards.

At the same time, ag retailer financing products have doubled their use since 2022—going from 4.5% to 9%. And 17.3% of farmers said in 2026 they were using operating lines of credits for input purchases.

Key to Business in 2026

Per the Bushel report, the winning formula for ag service providers in 2026 and beyond is clear: Use digital tools to handle the paperwork so your team has more time to handle the handshake.

Monitor Early-Season Disease Risks In Racehorse Hybrids

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:54:54 GMT

Farmers heading into a cold, wet stretch of weather with high‑yield “racehorse” type corn hybrids should be ready to scout aggressively and treat early for disease, advises Dan Bjorklund, technical agronomist with Landus Cooperative.

Bjorklund says the combination of water-saturated soils and below‑normal temperatures in parts of Iowa and some other Corn Belt states could be setting the stage for stand and yield losses, especially in hybrids with traits that are more offensive than defensive.

He says those hybrids with offensive genetics may excel in warmer, “friendlier” springs but they can stumble when early‑season stresses ramp up.

“We know from past experience that when we have an extended period of cold temperatures and rain after planting that emergence will be impacted,” Bjorklund says. “We won’t get those hybrids up and out of the ground maybe as uniformly as we would like, and that has yield impact. We might possibly lose some seedlings due to diseases out there.”

Bjorklund points to current forecasts in parts of Iowa calling for temperature highs in the 60s and lows in the 40s following heavy rainfall as a red flag for early disease pressure in both corn and soybeans.

Bjorklund references environmental swings in recent years that have triggered major disease outbreaks. He ties cold, wet conditions and certain genetics to fusarium-related crown and stalk rot issues.

Scout Corn At V5, Evaluate Stalks

While seed treatments offer a good line of defense, Bjorklund notes that environment and genetics can still impact hybrids depending on how long the seed sat in the ground prior to emergence. He points out that many high-yielding “racehorse” hybrids are ill-equipped to deal with saturated soils.

Bjorklund recommends making a scouting pass in corn at the V5 growth stage – when corn plants have five leaves with visible collars – and digging up some plants and splitting stalks open for evaluation.

“Look at the crown… if it’s nice and white and clean and doesn’t show a lot of damage, OK. But if you see a little bit of discoloration, then I would say you need to be concerned about potential crown and stalk rots,” he says.

It’s almost self-explanatory when you look at this stalk. The discoloration is what you don’t want to see at around V5, indicating disease pressure and the need for a fungicide.

(Landus Cooperative)

Bjorklund recommends making a fungicide application when early‑season conditions are stacked against the crop, especially if stalks reveal any discoloration.

“Try to get that fungicide on when you know that plant is at V5, when it’s making the rows around and the length. So that’s when ear determination is occurring. We don’t want to have the corn to have a bad day at that point in time,” he says.

He acknowledges there is debate over how well fungicide applications penetrate the plant, but says the yield data in cold, wet scenarios are hard to ignore.

“The data shows that V5 applications, in situations where we had cold days and over three inches of precipitation, we had a really nice yield response. We do know that the data is supportive,” he says.

As forecasts in some parts of the Corn Belt continue to point to cool, wet stretches, proactive scouting and timely treatment may be the difference between a racehorse hybrid that finishes strong — and one that doesn’t get a strong start out of the gate.

You can hear all of Bjorklund’s recommendations in his latest video here .

'Losing Glyphosate Would Be A Disastrous Blow For Farmers'

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 17:29:49 GMT

Farmers warn that access to cornerstone herbicides like glyphosate is not just a policy debate but a make-or-break factor for conservation, food prices and the future of U.S. agriculture.

On a media call hosted by the Modern Ag Alliance on Friday, three veteran Midwest farmers say they are farming through some of the tightest margins of their careers while shouldering growing uncertainty over crop-protection tools. They argue that science-based regulation, consistent labeling and a predictable legal environment are essential if they are to keep adopting conservation practices and stay competitive globally.

“We depend on crop-protection tools every single day that we’re raising a crop,” says northwest Missouri farmer Blake Hurst, who grows corn and soybeans. “Losing access to crop protection chemicals like glyphosate would be a terrible blow, a disastrous blow for farmers, as we’re facing these tough times.”

The discussion on Friday morning came about as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments in the Monsanto v. Durnell case scheduled for Monday, April 27. At the same time, Congress continues work on the farm bill, which contains provisions that could shape how crop-protection products are regulated.

Modern Ag Alliance Executive Director Elizabeth Burns-Thompson says the organization sees the Supreme Court case and farm bill development as landmarks.

“At the end of the day, I think the crux of the question is, if we cannot get the clarity or consistency around labeling, what does that mean big picture?” Burns-Thompson says.

She argues that without clear, uniform federal rules on what constitutes a sufficient label, companies may pull back on manufacturing or innovation, particularly inside the United States.

The Economic Reality Of Crop Protection

Hurst says farmers already operate on “margins that are negative,” forcing them to stretch machinery life, cut back on inputs and take on more debt just to stay in business. If a widely used and relatively affordable herbicide like glyphosate becomes unavailable or more difficult to access, he says the resulting cost increases will ripple from the farm field to the supermarket.

“That eventually shows up on food prices and grocery store shelves,” Hurst says. “We don’t have the margins to absorb major increases in costs, so we will pass those costs along eventually.”

Mark Jackson, who farms with his son southeast of Des Moines, says glyphosate is tightly linked to the conservation systems he has spent decades building. Jackson, a fifth-generation Iowa grower describes a lifetime of watching soil erosion give way to the use of more sustainable practices.

He says his farm has been in no-till for at least 25 years, a shift he also sees is taking root across much of Iowa.

“Roughly 40% or better of Iowa is in no-till conservation status, which is a tremendous mindset and a cultural mindset,” Jackson says. “When you talk about glyphosate leading the charge in conservation, I think we also need to remind people that we don’t use chemicals just willy-nilly.”

Relying On Science-Based Regulation

Jackson points to multiple federal agencies involved in approving and reviewing pesticides as evidence that farmers are using tools vetted by science and regulation.

“They have been approved by the EPA, the FDA, the USDA — you might say all the A’s in the government have gone through the pipelines to allow these chemicals to be used, and then they are reviewed at regular intervals,” he says. “So, I think we need to have confidence in what our government is there for, which is to maintain quality. We still do have the best and most consistent food supply in the world.”

Jackson also cites long-running health research involving farmers as pesticide applicators. Referring to a large North American study that monitored tens of thousands of farmers, including on his own farm, he says the findings in the study do not match public fears about glyphosate.

“Let’s not let emotion drive the conversation, but let’s follow the science,” he says.

Current Agronomic Tools Are Invaluable

For Bill Couser, a central Iowa corn and cattle producer who is “very heavily involved” in the ethanol industry, access to reliable herbicides is part of a larger system that includes livestock feed and low-carbon fuel markets. He says any disruption in tool availability quickly translates into higher input costs and lost opportunity.

“When I grow the feed, I have to make sure I have the lowest cost feedstuffs I can going into my farming operation, and also the safest feedstuffs that we can,” Couser says.

He ties herbicide use to carbon intensity scores that increasingly shape ethanol markets. No-till practices and efficient weed control, he says, help farmers lower carbon intensity levels, which in turn benefits both farmers and ethanol plants.

“When you look at just the state of Iowa and the 43 [ethanol] plants here, why, the way we bring this to our plants and to our livestock operations is huge,” Couser says.

Couser, who serves on an EPA Farm, Ranch and Rural Communities advisory committee, says having farmers at the table with regulators is essential.

“It gives the farmer a seat at the table, and we’re not on the menu,” he says. “We have to make sure that we sit with these industry leaders and make sure that we help them understand and educate them about the science and the products that we need to be able to use to be able to stay profitable in this industry.”

Stifling Innovation And The Path Forward

The farmers on the call said they accept that some older products have been removed from the market for safety reasons. Much of their concern now is that litigation and regulatory uncertainty could chill innovation and push companies to avoid introducing new technologies in the U.S. altogether.

“If we get a negative ruling [on Monday], that is going to make it easier to sue over not only glyphosate, but the other products we use, that means we won’t have new products introduced, because what company will take that risk?” Hurst says, referencing billions of dollars in legal costs tied to glyphosate litigation.

What worries him, he adds, is not just losing glyphosate, but the outlook for future products and continued innovation.

“The question that has to be asked and never is, is what next?” Hurst says. “We’re not going to go back to farming like we did in 1990. We don’t have the labor, we don’t have the diesel, we don’t have the people, and people won’t want to pay what food costs will be if we don’t have these products. So, what next? We’re going to use other chemicals that are more expensive, increasing feed costs, that are more dangerous.”

The farmers describe a common expectation of federal oversight and a shared belief that existing science supports continued use of glyphosate under current labels. Burns-Thompson says that is exactly why the Alliance is pushing for national clarity on labeling standards.

“By having shades of gray state-by-state, as to how that is ultimately satisfied, [it] creates a patchwork of confusion,” she says. “At the end of the day, the product doesn’t change from state-to-state. So neither should the safety warnings.”

For these farmers, what they say they want from policymakers and courts is not a free pass, but a stable, science-led framework that lets them plan years ahead — and keep farming with the next generation.

“We know this thing is changing again,” Couser says, noting that his sons are now the fifth generation on the family operation. “How do we make sure we continue that legacy to make sure they can farm in the future?”

Why Your ‘Worst’ Soybean Fields Should Be Planted First

Thu, 23 Apr 2026 16:32:23 GMT

When fields are ready to plant, soybean growers often head to their best ground first. Connor Sible is asking you to consider doing the opposite.

“If you want to maximize soybean yields across your entire farm — not just in one field — start by planting your lowest soil-testing fields first and save the highest soil-testing fields for last,” he advises.

That shift in focus is counter to what many farmers currently do, and it is at the heart of the planting strategy he recommends. The University of Illinois row-crop field researcher and assistant professor contends that it’s when and where you pull the planter into each field that can raise your overall farm average.

In practice, that means when an early planting window opens in April or the first of May and several soybean fields are dry enough for a green light, the first acres you plant should be the ones with lower soil test values — not the “good” fields on the soil test map.

“This gives the late-planted soybean the advantage it needs to put on more bushels relative to early planting,” Sible says. “Between the soil testing data and the planting date response data we have, it makes a lot of sense.”

Why Early And Late Soybeans Behave Differently

Sible says there is a decade-plus of field trials from the University of Illinois comparing planting dates, soil tests, and yield responses, verifying that this change in planting strategy makes sense. The full study, led by Marcos Loman and advised by Fred Below, summarizes their findings and is available here .

Part of Sible’s explanation is that early-planted soybeans in April tend to yield more overall, but these beans grow slowly at first in cool, often wet soils with lower solar radiation. Their nutrient uptake is long and gradual.

“Early soybean, while yielding higher, has slower growth and probably doesn’t need fertilizer” he says.

Because those plants grow and require nutrients slowly, the soil can usually keep up with nutrient demand, even in lower-testing fields. That’s why he says early planting is the best “boost” you can give to weaker ground.

Later-planted soybeans, going in during late May or even into June, are going into a different environment: warmer soils, longer days and more solar radiation.

“Late-planted soybean, while lower yielding and a lower total nutrient requirement, grow so fast that if we want to optimize the return on fertilizer investment, it’s probably going to pay back better on late-planted beans,” Sible says.

Fast-growing late-May soybeans in Illinois pull nutrients at a higher rate, and Sible’s data shows they respond more strongly to higher soil test levels and applied fertilizer. That’s why he wants the best-testing fields held back for the later planting window.

“Late-planted beans grow so fast, the soil (fertility) probably cannot keep up,” he explains. “The late-planted soybean benefits more from that high soil test environment.”

How Farmers Can Implement The ‘New’ Planting Strategy

Sible is quick to acknowledge that in the real world, farmers will start the planting process in whatever field is fit at the time.

“Obviously you’re going to plant the driest field first,” he says, noting that central and northern Illinois have had recent rainfall.

But once more than one field is ready, he contends farmers can start making more intentional choices.

His recommended process for soybean planting looks like this:

Sort fields by crop and soil test.
Start out by grouping soybean fields by soil test levels — lower-testing and higher-testing, especially for phosphorus and potassium, but considering overall fertility.
Identify likely early-plant candidates.
Look at drainage, residue and soil type to consider which soybean fields typically dry out first. Within that group, mark the lower-testing fields.
Use early planting on “weaker” fields.
When an early planting window opens and several soybean fields are fit, move the planter to the lower soil-testing soybean fields first — those that usually don’t win the “yield contest” on your farm.
Reserve high-testing fields for later.
If weather or logistics push some soybean acres into late May or early June, prioritize the higher soil-testing fields for those later planting dates, where their strong fertility levels can support rapid growth.
Align fertilizer decisions with timing.
On early-planted soybeans, especially in lower soil-testing fields, be conservative with extra fertilizer unless there is a clear nutrient deficiency. On late-planted soybeans in high-testing fields, consider that any fertilizer investment is more likely to deliver ROI.

“If we line up planting date, soil test and fertilizer strategy, we can do a better job of maximizing soybean yield across the farm,” Sible says.

From Field-by-Field To A Higher Farm Average

Sible frames his planting strategy for soybeans as a mindset change. Instead of asking, “How do I make my best field even better?” he wants farmers to ask, “How do I pull my whole average up?”

“The principle is pretty simple,” he says. “Early planting is a powerful yield tool — use it where the soil is weakest. High soil fertility is a powerful growth tool; use it where beans are going in late and growing fast.”

Farmers won’t always see the highest absolute yield on those late-planted, high-testing fields, he acknowledges. Weather and your calendar date still matter. But he believes the relative performance and return on fertilizer can improve when planting order and soil tests work together.

For growers struggling to manage tight margins, it’s a strategy that costs nothing to try except a reshuffled planting list.

“Hopefully you can take these concepts back and take them to your acres,” Sible says. “It’s about getting the most from the whole farm, not just one field.”

Sible laid out his planting recommendations for soybeans during the 2026 Crop Management Conference at the University of Illinois.

Farmers Emphasize Demand, Not Payments, Is The ‘Bridge To Better Times' For Agriculture

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 22:26:14 GMT

Two Midwest farmers are pinning their hopes for the future on stronger demand for corn and soybeans — especially the latter — as they navigate tight margins, high input costs, and an uncertain price outlook.

Northern Illinois farmer Steve Pitstick and south-central Iowa farmer Dennis Bogaards say they have exhausted most cost-cutting options for this season. They believe future profitability now rests on whether demand for both crops — particularly from domestic soybean crush and fuel markets — expands enough to support higher prices.

One silver lining currently, Pitstick says, is his relatively strong position on fertilizer heading into the 2026 planting season.

“We will do pretty much the dry spread program we always do,” he says. “We cut the rates a little bit on the phosphates just because of price. We booked our 32% in September, something we traditionally do. We have all the nitrogen bought, so I feel good about 2026 from that aspect.”

While he believes additional fertilizer is available, he notes it will likely be priced at a premium.

“I believe I can get more if I need it. I may not like the price, but I can get more,” he told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory during the weekly Farmer Forum segment.

Little To No Expansion On The Horizon

As the season begins, both farmers emphasize that the coming years will have farmers focusing on survival and strategic adjustments rather than acreage expansion.

One adjustment Bogaards is making is front-loading some of his nitrogen needs this season while leaving a portion open in case prices break.

“We booked anhydrous early on for this year, back in early fall, and got an OK price,” Bogaards says. “I have a little bit of sidedress that we do. We book about half of that, and I sit open on the rest of it. I’ll wait and see where it goes.”

Bogaards remains committed to sidedressing as long as product is available and prices do not continue ratcheting up. “If I can get it, I’ll put it on, unless it is a crazy, crazy price,” he says.

Like many U.S. growers, both Bogaards and Pitstick say there is virtually no room left to cut fertilizer use without risking yields.

“There is no place to cut back. We are being as efficient as we can be,” Pitstick says.

Bogaards agrees, noting that nitrogen is not the place to skimp. “Maybe a year or so, you can cut back on the P and K a little bit, but you do not want to get caught in three or four years of that.”

He also remains reluctant to drop fungicides. “Fungicides really pay off,” he says. “In the past, we did not use them, but the last few years they really paid, and I would hate to not spray them.”

Uncertainty About The 2027 Crop Mix

While the 2026 crop is largely “business as usual,” both farmers told Flory that 2027 brings real uncertainty—especially regarding nitrogen supplies. Pitstick is concerned about how global demand could impact costs for U.S. producers.

“I am worried about the price of the nitrogen,” he says. “It may not be an issue in the United States from a supply standpoint, but the rest of the world… could export our product because of opportunity cost, and that drives the price up. It is a total wait and see.”

Flory underscored how global trade flows directly shape what American farmers pay, noting that some fertilizer shipments originally destined for the U.S. were recently rerouted.

“Some boats are diverted from the U.S. to other countries,” Flory says. “If you want your share, you have to beat the next guy in line with the price.”

If nitrogen prices soar while corn prices stagnate, Pitstick says his rotation could shift. “That might change how we do things in 2027. We may have to go to more soybeans,” he says.

Bogaards also expects to alter his corn–soybean mix, given the potential demand from domestic crush and renewable fuels.

“In the past, we were probably 60% to 65% corn,” he says. “We have been backing off of that. I still do a little bit of corn-on-corn, but I might try to go to a 50–50 rotation.”

Flory believes this shift could help rebalance supplies and improve price prospects. “If we can pull some acres away from corn and get this thing rebalanced, maybe that is our bridge to a better time,” Flory says. “Our bridge to a better time is more demand across the board and crops competing for acres — not another payment.”

Bogaards says the shifting economics are already evident. “A couple of years ago, people said soybeans are a drag on our financial statements. It looks like almost the opposite right now.”

Even so, Bogaards is cautious about making long-term decisions based on short-term signals. “I can change acres right now, but by next fall, it might be the worst decision. I think you have to go with your rotation and stick with it.”

Pitstick links his long-term outlook to fuel sector growth, noting that both corn and soybeans increasingly function as energy crops.

“Some of the most profitable years of my career were when we had high fuel prices because we were also a fuel crop,” he says. “I have some optimism that these high fuel prices will cause some demand and increase our crop prices.”

For now, both farmers say their immediate job is to manage through 2026 while keeping their options open. With high costs for fertilizer, fuel, and machinery, they see expanded demand as the only realistic path forward.

“It is just survival at this point,” Bogaards says. “We just have to make sure we can survive and keep plugging through it.”

You can listen to the complete discussion between Bogaards, Pitstick and Flory on AgriTalk at the link below:

Assess Soybean Frost Damage: Ken Ferrie Urges Patience, Replanting Discipline After Hard Freeze

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 15:53:31 GMT

Earlier this week after a series of storms and subfreezing temperatures swept through central Illinois, agronomist Ken Ferrie walked his March-planted soybean test plots south of the Bloomington area and didn’t like what he found.

“We had a substantial frost, reports of temperatures from 29 to 32 degrees, with the frost hanging around three hours or more,” Ferrie says. “Things are kind of crunchy in the grass this morning.”

That crunch underfoot translates into real damage in soybeans. Some plants, Ferrie says, are not going to make it.

“The worst hit are soybeans in the unifoliate stage or more and that were planted in our low ground,” he notes.

Illinois wasn’t the only state where soybeans were hit by frost. Weather reports from Monday and Tuesday indicate a late-season cold snap brought frost and freezing temperatures to at least four additional key soybean-producing states, impacting parts of Iowa, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio.

According to the USDA Crop Progress report released on April 20, roughly 12% of the national soybean crop had been planted. States like Illinois and Indiana were slightly ahead of their five-year averages, making crops there more vulnerable to this specific frost event.

Don’t Rush To Replant, Be Disciplined In Your Approach

Ferrie describes a clear set of visual cues growers can use to evaluate frost damage in their crop.

“Look for unifoliate leaves that are dark and deflated, and the cotyledons have a dark color,” he says. “The biggest telltale is the stem has no turgor pressure right below the cotyledons.”

He notes that those beans with discolored cotyledons and limited turgor pressure will require more time to see if they will refire at the cotyledon node.

Ferrie urges growers to take a systematic approach to evaluating frost-damaged soybeans with these four steps:

Check bean growth stage and field position (low ground vs. higher areas).
Inspect unifoliate leaves and cotyledons for dark, deflated tissue.
Pinch stems just below the cotyledons to feel for turgor.
Flag concerning areas and return in a couple of days to reevaluate survival and stand uniformity.

This bean is at the VC growth stage. While leaves look nipped and are discolored, what matters even more is what’s happening just below the cotyledons. Ferrie says there is no turgor pressure in the stem underneath the cotyledons. Turgor pressure serves soybeans a number of ways, including support for the movement of nutrients and water. “This plant is going to dry up and die on us and not make it,” Ferrie says.

(Crop-Tech Consulting Video)

This plant shows some leaf damage and possible stem damage just below the upper leaves. However, turgor pressure lower in the plant looks good. This plant is likely to survive, but Ferrie says farmers would want to reassess plants like this a few days following a frost to make sure.

(Crop-Tech Consulting Video)

Young soybeans, like this one, handle frost better than plants at VC and older because they are closer to the ground, allowing them to benefit from soil warmth, and they have thicker, waxy cotyledons. This plant is going to do fine.

(Crop-Tech Consulting)

Once you’ve assessed damage, the questions then are, how many beans survived, and how uniform a stand remains?

Replant decisions, Ferrie emphasizes, should be based on surviving plant counts and uniformity, not on first impressions the morning after a frost. That will take a few days to assess.

Why Risk Planting Soybeans In March?

Ferrie addressed the broader strategy that put March-planted beans at risk in the first place — and why many growers benefit from planting early.

“Guys ask me why plant beans in March, when you can plant them April 15,” Ferrie says. “If you can plant them April 15, not much is gained. But if you get rained out at May 1 or later, you could definitely miss the early flowering window.”

That early flowering window, he notes, remains a key driver of soybean yield potential. The risk of frost is the tradeoff.

“So that risk of early planting and dealing with frost and the need to help them up with a hoe and things like that, that always needs to be weighed against missing the early flowering window,” he says.

Go Time For Planting More Soybeans

Ferrie says the next few days are a green light for planting soybeans in central Illinois.

“If you don’t have your full-season beans planted by April 24, you may want to switch to your shorter-season beans, giving them a better chance at early flowering. Our early flowering window is closing for these full-season beans,” he adds.

The freeze may claim some of the earliest soybeans, but Ferrie insists growers still have tools to protect yield — from switching maturities as key dates approach to making informed replant calls based on stand counts and plant response.

Younger soybeans typically handle the cold and frost better.

“Population is, here at the campus, the last emerging beans, still in the cotyledon stage, are in good shape,” he says. “And the beans that we plant in the covers are protected well.”

Ferrie’s message to farmers this week is clear: get out and assess your crop, but don’t rush to replant. “By the end of the week, we’ll know how rough this frost damage is, and we’ll reassess replanting decisions after that,” he says.

You can watch Ferrie’s brief video on how to assess soybean damage here .

Why Traceability is Table Stakes in the Grain Business

Tue, 21 Apr 2026 14:48:44 GMT

With recently announced guidance from the Department of the Treasury, to support the documentation of agricultural production required to participate for Section 45Z tax credits, Bushel and Verity have integrated their on-farm data, sustainability modeling and compliance platform. Kimberly Bowron, president of Verity, and Jake Joraanstad, CEO of Bushel, explain what’s next for traceability in the grain business.

Lessons From The Field

Bowron says the pilot project at Gevo’s ethanol facility in Richardton, North Dakota, helps to illustrate the opportunities that are unfolding and how it will effect the entire supply chain. Its “farm-to-flight” program included 500,000 acres being loaded into the program with the farm-level attributes.
When it comes to farmer engagement in programs, she says it really boils down to three things:

Eliminate Duplicate Paperwork: Streamlining the administrative burden.
Data Sovereignty: Ensuring data is protected and ownership remains with the farmer.
Economic Clarity: Providing a clear, transparent financial upside.

“We’re learning that workflow is everything. And so if it feels like there’s extra admin work and uncertain payoff, participation sort of slows down. But if we can be clear about all of those things, then growers are very engaged,” she says. “I think another takeaway is just trust. Farmers really want to know exactly who’s seeing their data, so we like to be transparent about how that’s being used. And that transparency isn’t really optional for us. We want to be clear about the economic opportunity and the adoption.”

Bowron shares the supply sheds around the biofuels producer will be driven by the evolution of these programs, the value presented to the farmers, and how market-based opportunities continue to expand including carbon intensity, scope 3 emissions and more. But the common undercurrent empowering the conversation of what’s possible is transparency.

Joraanstad says traceability was once a long time ‘scary’ word in the grain business because of the difficulty in delivering the full origination of a kernel of corn through the supply chain.

“It just wasn’t practical,” he says. “But if you’re a biofuels plant in the future, if you can’t do this then you’re going to be losing to those who can.”

It’s the intersection of the real dollars of cents potential of tax deducations such as 45Z plus the technology advancing the digitization of records putting this new mandate on how to stay competitive and profitable.

“This has been a long time coming,” Joraanstad says. “But the truth is that all of the previous discussion around what data is required, there was a lot of voluntary effort, and let’s call it the first version of all of this effort.”

For the biofuels producers, Bowron says the digitization not only provides participation for the carbon credits or tax deductions but also the specialized markets.

“Verity’s real role is to take all that farm-level data, translate that into a field CI (Carbon Intensity), and then take that CI and attach it to a gallon in an ethanol plant,” Bowron says. So that you have a CI that attaches to that gallon. We also think about this in terms of different attributes, like practice attributes. ‘This gallon can go to Canada because it’s got all those attributes; this gallon can go to California.’”

While the 45Z guidance is helping proving an outline for the potential, it’s a whole new chapter. And one that is still being written. The final rule isn’t expected to be released before June.

“We’re still wanting some better final answers as we’re going through this,” Jooranstad says. “But now all of us can act with some confidence that that’s true and this is a requirement and it’s not just a hope and a dream.”

Both industry leaders says it’s important to note how 45Z works, especially that it’s the biofuel producer receiving the tax credit.

“This isn’t like an EQIP program. There’s no direct USDA payments that are happening. And for an ethanol plant, it’s actually a lot of work,” Bowron says. “They can’t sell the value of that tax credit for the headline price.”

The ‘hidden costs’ for ethanol plants include:

Discounted Value: Credits are often sold at 90-95% of face value.
Overhead: Costs include broker fees, legal counsel, and insurance wraps for audit protection.
Delayed Realization: Benefits are filed with taxes and often not realized until a year later.

Hear more from these industry voices in the latest Scoop Podcast.

Canadian Farmers Look For A Fresh Start After The Driest Year In Decades

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:47:51 GMT

The way Tim Webster tells it, his 2025 cropping season was nearly a disaster. Summer delivered the lowest July–August rainfall his area had seen in 50 years. That lack and abnormally high temperatures pushed corn and soybeans to their limits.

“We had just enough moisture to get to the finish line,” recalls Webster, a sixth-generation farmer based just west of Lindsay, Ontario, Canada. The end result: corn and soybean yields came in at about half of normal.

Webster and fellow farmer Steve Crothers, who farms on the north shore of Lake Ontario about 50 miles east of Toronto, recently sat down with Illinois-based Farm Journal Field Agronomist Ken Ferrie to talk about how they’re adjusting cropping plans for 2026 after last year’s drought.

Drought Reshapes Farmer Expectations

For Webster, last season was a stark reminder of how quickly yield potential can evaporate. Ultimately, Webster’s bottom line took a hit.

“We’re hoping that doesn’t repeat again,” he told Ferrie.

Crothers’ experience, though slightly better, was still defined by drought. Growing corn, soybeans, wheat and edible beans along Lake Ontario, he says it was the driest of his 40-plus years in farming.

“We had a couple half-inch rains, so we kind of ended up with three-quarters of our long-term average yield. So, we fared a little bit better,” Crothers says.

Still, the season left him and Webster concerned about their cropping plans and finances for this year.

Crop Insurance As A Lifeline

Ferrie drew a comparison between Canadian and American safety nets as he listened to Crothers and Webster describe their experiences. In the U.S., Ferrie notes farmers often lean on multiple levels of crop insurance to blunt losses in a bad production year. He asked whether similar options exist for Canadian farmers.

Webster replied that growers there do have a provincial crop insurance program, but participation and coverage levels vary.
“I think we all felt after last year, maybe we should have been insured a little higher. But we were very happy to have what we had to help pay the bills, that’s for sure,” Webster notes.

Crothers says specialty crops, including edible white beans and adzuki beans, come under similar insurance frameworks as corn and soybeans, though they have higher premiums because of their higher value.

Most of the white beans grown in his part of Ontario head to the United Kingdom, while the adzuki beans (also called mung beans) are shipped to Japan, Crothers notes. Those export markets add another layer of risk to already weather-sensitive crops, making insurance an important backstop when weather or markets turn against them.

Fertilizer Sticker Shock Hits Canadian Growers

If drought defined 2025, fertilizer prices loom large over this season for Canadian farmers, much like they do for U.S. farmers.

“For 2026 our biggest thing is hope — hope for typical average rainfalls after last year’s drought,” Crothers says. “And then, of course, the economic challenges with the fertilizer situation are obviously troubling to everybody.”

He tells Ferrie most fertilizer in his part of Ontario is not prepaid “The fellows using 28% are usually prepaid, because it’s been hard to get the last few years. But generally, not near as much fertilizer is prepaid as what, in a perfect world, would have been.” Crothers reports.

That leaves many Canadian farmers more exposed to potential sticker shock as they head into spring planting.

Webster says he pre-bought some of his nitrogen (N) in February and is now leaning hard into a strategy of splitting applications and dialing back on more expensive, slow-release N options where he can.

This year, for his wheat topdress program, fertility costs didn’t pencil out, forcing a change in his plans.

“It’s $32 more [per acre] to go with the time-release product versus straight urea,” Webster notes. “So, I think on our wheat this year we’re going to do a lot of split applications.”

With diesel, fertilizer and other costs trending higher, he says, “anything you can do to save small increments adds up … for the whole operation.”

Cropping Plans: Adjust Or Stay The Course?

Both farmers describe their region as an area where crop rotations remain fairly consistent: corn, soybeans and wheat typically share the mix. Asked whether high input prices and drought fears would drive large acreage shifts this season, Webster says his own operation plans to stay the course with its rotation, helped by a marketing strategy that spreads grain sales out over time to manage risk and meet mortgage payments.

Still, he’s aware some of his neighbors are recalibrating their cropping plans.

“I know some guys are going to go less corn, more beans — just less dollars to put it in,” Webster notes. “Maybe the profits aren’t as high, but there’s less risk involved.”

Ferrie notes that, similar to Ontario, many U.S. growers also appear to be largely holding to their established crop plans, as their major fertilizer and seed commitments were already made before input costs soared.

In a region still feeling the effects of the driest season in decades, both Webster and Crothers are essentially betting on a return to something closer to normal this season — average rains, manageable input costs and no repeat of last year’s extremes.

“If we get good yields, then we can deal with those [costs],” Crothers says. “But another weather year like last year would definitely be a struggle for a lot of people.”

Crothers and Webster spoke with Ferrie during a meeting hosted by the Durham Soil and Crop Association, a grassroots group that works under Ontario’s agricultural umbrella to bring new ideas, funding opportunities and conservation programs to farmers in the region.

You can catch the entire conversation between Ferrie, Crothers and Webster on this week’s Boots In The Field podcast, available below.

The 20-Bushel Wake-Up Call One Farmer Is Using To Boost Soybean Yields

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 16:42:59 GMT

For years, Stephen Butz watched his corn yields climb while his soybeans stalled. The numbers didn’t lie: corn was steadily improving, while soybeans were “average at best,” he recalls, running hot and cold from year to year with no clear pattern.

“Our soybeans were just plateauing,” says Butz, who farms near Kankakee, Ill.

The turning point for Butz came several years ago on a 120-acre field split between two soybean varieties — 80 acres on the north side and 40 acres on the south. Everything matched: planting date, field conditions, management. The only difference was the variety planted.

At harvest, the 40-acre section of the field was 18 to 19 bushels per acre better.

A talk with Butz’s seedsman revealed the answer: the higher-yielding soybeans carried the Peking source of resistance to soybean cyst nematode (SCN). That single difference explained nearly 20-bushels-per-acre the farm had been losing to SCN for years.

“Honestly, it was just one of those deals where our seed guy had said, ‘Hey, this is a good number.’ So we’d planted the variety kind of naively,” Butz says. “But lo and behold, it was a huge benefit for us and showed us a problem we had on this farm and other farms, too.”

With the initial finding of SCN, Butz started soil testing to identify how significant the problem was across his farm. Surprisingly, soil tests revealed SCN populations ranging from the low hundreds to as high as 5,000 per sample.

“We’ve got a good amount of farms in that 3,000 to 5,000 count, which is an extremely high amount that I need to address,” says Butz, who samples fields ahead of planting.

Spring 2026: Going 100% Peking

After splitting acres for several years between non-GMO and Enlist soybeans, Butz made a decisive shift to the latter for 2026 as the non-GMO soybeans do not carry resistance to SCN.

“This spring, we are going with 100% Peking,” he says

For Butz, the move is less about chasing bonus bushels of soybeans and more about stopping the hidden losses SCN has been causing. He’s certain he’s left a lot of yield potential on the table in previous seasons.

“We’re not so much adding bushels (with the Peking) as we expect to relieve the stress that’s been taking bushels away,” he says.

Going all-Peking this season is only part of his management plan. The other piece is rotating more between corn and soybeans and, over time, between different SCN technologies, including Peking and PI 88788.

Butz’s cropping pattern follows a rough structure of thirds in any given year: about a third of his total acres in corn or soybeans and another third in continuous corn. That same structure drives his soil sampling schedule and will, in the future, he says, guide how he rotates SCN resistance traits across the landscape.

He also hopes to bring new technology into the mix, including the new SCN solution on the way from BASF Agricultural Solutions, called Nemasphere. It is the first-ever biotech trait designed specifically to address SCN.

Unlike traditional native resistance found in PI 88788 and Peking, Nemasphere is based on a transgenic trait — a Cry14 protein engineered directly into the soybean — explains Hugo Borsari, BASF vice president of business management for seeds in North America.

Beyond Yield: Logistics And Longevity

For Butz, the case for more soybeans, and especially better-protected soybeans, isn’t just agronomic. It’s logistical and financial.
Soybeans help spread out workload during planting and harvest, he explains, easing the strain of managing continuous corn acres. They also inject rotation into fields that might otherwise lean too heavily to continuous corn.

“Years of continuous corn in some spots is fine, but rotation is obviously better,” he said during a recent panel discussion hosted by BASF.

Like he found out by accident, Butz says he believes many other growers might be losing significant yield to SCN without realizing it.

“You might live in an area that you raise 75-bushel beans all the time, or 80-bushel beans, and that’s amazing. But what if the potential is 90 or 100 bushels?“ Butz asks. “There’s plenty of people out there that might be losing 10, 15 bushels off the top, and that adds up fast. You’re freaking losing $100 an acre pretty quick that would help a lot with your bottom line.”

Maryland Farmer Turns Stringent Fertilizer Restrictions Into An Opportunity To Innovate

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 19:15:34 GMT

On the Delmarva Peninsula, where every pound of fertilizer applied is regulated, Maryland farmer Temple Rhodes is rebuilding his corn production system from the ground up — literally.

“We are in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, so all eyes are on us,” Rhodes says. “I am 50 miles from Baltimore, 50 miles from D.C., 67 miles from Philadelphia. We are in a hotbed of regulation.”

For the past 25-plus years, Chestnut Manor Farms has operated under a state-mandated nutrient management plan that caps how much nitrogen and phosphorus can be applied. Rhodes says participating in the program is not voluntary.

“It is forced on us with no incentive. You just have to do it,” he says. “So, we have to reinvent ourselves. We have to start looking at other ways to do things.”

Rhodes grows corn, soybeans and wheat, along with a few acres of grain sorghum. He also runs a cow-calf operation and backgrounds a couple hundred head of steers each winter on cover crops. The diversity helps, but the real transformation is happening in how he feeds his 1,700-acre corn crop.

From Front-Loading To Spoon-Feeding

For years, the standard practice was to front-load fertilizer before planting and hope enough stayed in place through the growing season. Under tighter rules and scrutiny, Rhodes says that approach no longer works.

“We used to put 100% of our nitrogen up front, then plant a crop on it and expect it to be there all along,” he says. “That is where we find out we are making a mistake. We are limited in how much fertility we can put on, so we better get it on at the right time, in the right place, or we are going to run out.”

Today, Chestnut Manor relies on what Rhodes describes as a systematic, layered approach that can include planter-applied fertilizer (in-furrow and 2x2 programs), split in-season applications of nitrogen, extensive cover crops and biologicals.

“When you take a systematic approach to all these things, it becomes a different animal,” Rhodes says.

Most of his corn is grown using a strip-till system with strips built in the spring. State rules prevent him from applying fertilizer in the fall, so he must work ahead of the planter using modest rates of nitrogen and then follow up with in-season applications.

“My end goal is to grow 225 bushels per acre,” he says. “I am going to put about 0.7 pounds of nitrogen per bushel on my crop. I can get away with that if I spoon-feed it correctly. If I put it all down up front, I am going to need about 1.25 pounds. I’m saving a lot of fertility by doing it this way.”

Rhodes says Maryland’s regulatory framework ensures he stays within strict application limits. The state’s phosphorus usage tool combines soil samples, yield history, location and soil type into an algorithm that dictates what farmers can apply.

“You put your soil samples in, you put your yield goal in, and it spits out what you can put on,” Rhodes says. “If you say your yield goal is 250 bushels but your APH is only 180, that is not how it works. Your APH and your yield goal have to be very similar, or you are not going to get to put on what you want. They are going to tell you what you can put on. Period.”

A New Technology Takes Root

Working under those constraints, Rhodes has become aggressive about testing new technologies that promise better nutrient efficiency and stronger root systems. Not one to be painted into a corner, Rhodes stays open to all ideas of what could work within the state’s mandated parameters. One of those is a biostimuant from NewLeaf Symbiotics.

The product is a non-GMO, naturally occurring bacteria known as PPFMs (Pink-Pigmented Facultative Methylotrophs), often called “M-trophs”. The PPFM-powered biostimulant is designed to improve crop yield, nutrient uptake, and stress tolerance, according to NewLeaf.

In the process of trialing the product, Rhodes shared the technology with XtremeAg, a group of seven farmers across the country who rigorously test new technologies in different environments.

“If we can test a product at multiple locations — a guy from Iowa, a guy from Maryland, a guy down South — and it works across everybody, that is big,” Rhodes says. “It is huge, because what works for me might not work for the guy in the Midwest. It all goes back to soil type and environment.”

Rhodes says what he was looking for from the biostimulant was stress mitigation and nutrient scavenging that can improve his current foundation for the future.

“I need a massive root system that can go out and get more nutrients, because I am limited on how many nutrients I can put on,” he says. “If I build a plant that scavenges more, that is a home run for us.”

Cutting Irrigation And Boosting Biomass

Rhodes farms a mix of acres, with about 25% irrigated and 75% dryland. After the first year of trialing the NewLeaf technology he found he didn’t need to run his irrigation system as frequently.

“The root system and the plant that it makes, I do not have anywhere near the stress,” he says. “When it’s hot and dry we would normally run the irrigation system, but I found I do not need to put on as much water.”

With irrigation costing about $125 per acre, every pass he eliminates adds up to a significant savings.

“If I make 12 passes a year, I can save $10 an acre just by not turning it on one time,” he says.

Beyond water savings, Rhodes estimates he is getting 30% more biomass in the plants.

“We actually cut corn stalks off at the ground and weighed them. We did not even measure the roots — just the plant itself. Thirty percent more biomass than my grower standard practice,” he says.

The biomass offers a payoff for grain production and nutrients for his cattle operation.

“I chop silage, so if I can add 30% more, that is 30% fewer acres I need to chop,” he reports. “It costs me by the acre, so 30% less is massive. And the nutrients in that plant are higher than in my grower standard practice. It all follows each other.”

Learning Curve And Next Steps

While the product delivers more biomass and higher yields, it did create new management challenges. Rhodes discovered the downside of building a much bigger plant on a tight nitrogen budget.

“In my system, I put about 30% of my nitrogen needs down with my strip till. I plant on top of it, everything looks great, it makes this massive system — and then I end up running out of nitrogen later in the season,” he recalls.

He spotted the problem at harvest, with many ears showing considerable tip-back of an inch or two. Rhodes figures the crop just “outran” his nitrogen program. Even so, the fields containing the experimental treatment still out-yielded his standard fields by an average of 11 bushels per acre.

The experience pushed him to rethink nitrogen application timing and total rate.

“I’m pulling some of the front-end nitrogen out and putting it into reproduction, so I do not run out at the end,” he says. “Instead of 0.7 pounds per bushel, maybe I can go to 0.8 or 0.9, maybe even one-to-one, and still be efficient because of what this product is doing.”

The results from the past two years of field testing are strong enough that Rhodes is no longer treating the technology as a small trial.
“We plant about 1,700 acres of corn, so it’s going on every acre of corn,” he says.

On a tightly regulated farm in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, Rhodes is betting that bigger roots, smarter fertilizer use and careful experimentation with nutrients will keep his operation profitable — all while staying within the rules.

Why Your Herbicide Can Fail Even if You Follow the Label

Thu, 16 Apr 2026 18:37:11 GMT

When weeds break through your herbicide, it’s easy to blame the product, rate or application timing. However, weed-control experts Greg Dahl and Joe Ikley suggest the real culprits might be something else altogether: the water in the tank and the adjuvant — or lack thereof — mixed into it.

Dahl, a retired research manager at WinField United, says hard data tells the story best. After reviewing thousands of university trials, he found
that skipping the herbicide’s required adjuvant is an invitation for weed-control failure.

“We saw a 30% to 90% reduction in weed control when the adjuvant was left out,” Dahl says. “That’s a pretty big sting.”

But simply using an adjuvant isn’t enough. The trials showed that using the wrong class of adjuvant in the tank can slash performance by up to 50%. Even settling for a “good enough” product over a premium version can result in a 25% drop in efficacy. Notes Dahl: In the world of weed control, “close enough” often isn’t.

(Council of Producers & Distributors of Agrotechnology)

Solutions That Work

Hard water in the spray tank is often a contributor to poor weed control. When spray water is loaded with calcium and magnesium cations, that can create a hostile environment for weak-acid herbicides like glyphosate. These minerals physically bind to the herbicide, forming particles the plant cannot absorb.

“Plants don’t eat rocks,” says Ikley, a weed specialist at North Dakota State University Extension.

To counter this, he and Dahl recommend using ammonium sulfate (AMS) as a dedicated water conditioner. Dahl’s research indicates that in cases of extreme hardness, adding at least 8.5 lbs. of AMS per 100 gallons is necessary to fully neutralize the water and restore herbicide efficacy.

However, the battle isn’t just in the tank; it’s often on weed leaves. Ikley points out that certain weeds, like velvetleaf, actually secrete their own calcium crystals onto their leaf surfaces.

“Several of our weed species actually need higher AMS rates because of the crystals on the surface of that leaf,” Ikley explains. “We have to account for that interaction on the weed surface, not just in the water.”

While “all-in-one” adjuvant blends offer convenience, Ikley and Dahl urge caution. To hit a specific price point or fit multiple ingredients into the jug, manufacturers sometimes compromise on the water-conditioning component. University trials consistently show that very few “convenience” products can outperform the gold-standard combination of AMS plus a nonionic surfactant, Ikley and Dahl say.

Conditioners Aren’t All Created Equal

Dahl and Ikley both note that water conditioners and “all-in-one” adjuvants vary widely in performance. To get everything into a gallon and hit a certain price point, they say manufacturers sometimes compromise and come up short on one of the functions, often the one for water conditioning.

Ikley says university trials show only a handful of conditioners outperform the standard combination of AMS plus a nonionic surfactant.

“A few of the water conditioners do quite well,” he reports. “The rest don’t perform as well as AMS plus surfactant.”

Before they select or change the adjuvant used, Dahl and Ikley tell farmers to test their water, and ask the laboratory to report the results to them in parts per million.

“Some labs report in grains, and then you’ve got to do more math,” Dahl says.

Ikley adds a practical tip: always run the water for a few minutes before taking a sample to ensure you aren’t testing stagnant residue from the lines.

Ultimately, adjuvants are a valuable safety net for herbicide performance and weed control. As Dahl puts it, “You can raise herbicide rates until you can’t anymore. When you need help, the adjuvants can help.”

Ag Retail’s Leadership Shift: 16 CEO Changes at U.S. Cooperatives

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 22:26:26 GMT

In the past year, retirements have dominated the reasons for 16 leadership changes at U.S. farm supply cooperatives. With a denser co-op footprint, Iowa, Minnesota and the Dakotas lead with the most transitions in the past year.

As Laura Blome, president of Hedlin Ag, shared earlier this year on The Scoop Podcast , retirements are accelerating the leadership crunch in ag retail.

Here’s a list of leadership changes at U.S. farm supply co-ops:

Co-op Name	Location	Outgoing Leader	Incoming Leader	Title Used	Transition Type	Timing
Ag Partners Cooperative	MN	Bill Ahlbrecht	Rick Anderson	GM/CEO	Retirement → internal promotion	2026
Agwrx Cooperative	SD	Lanny Kirsch	Kent Borstad	CEO	New CEO appointment	2025
ALCIVIA	WI/IL/MN/IA	Jim Dell	Rodney Balvitsch	CEO	Resignation → interim → permanent	Aug 2025–Jan 2026
AXESS Cooperative (merger)	ND	—	Darren Benike	General Manager	Merger-driven	2025
Central Farm Service	MN	Merlyn Kruger	Kevin “KC” Graner	President/CEO	Retirement → internal promotion	2025
Crystal Valley Cooperative	MN	Roger Kienholtz	Mitch Altermatt	CEO	Retirement → external hire	2025
Central Valley Ag	NE	Carl Dickinson	Nic McCarthy	President/CEO	Retirement → internal promotion	2025
Farmers Cooperative Elevator (Arcadia)	IA	Darrell Henkenius	Nate Fara	GM/CEO	Retirement → internal promotion	2026
Farmers Cooperative Elevator (Ottosen)	IA	Kevin Walker	Justin “Judd” Foth	GM/CEO	Retirement → replacement	2025
Five Star Cooperative	IA	Scott Black	Tony Myers	General Manager	Retirement → replacement	2025–2026
Glacial Plains Cooperative	MN	Mark Greicar	Alex Tweed	General Manager	Retirement → internal promotion	2025
Keystone Cooperative	IN/OH/MI	Kevin Still	TBD	CEO	Retirement (planned)	Announced Sept 2025
Landus Cooperative	IA	Matt Carstens	Eric Heismeyer	CEO	Resignation → external hire	Apr–Sept 2025
Plains Grain & Agronomy	ND	Keith Brandt	Jacob Bailey	CEO/GM	Succession (external)	2025
Rockingham Cooperative	VA	Sam Liggett	Jason Hoekstra	General Manager	Retirement → external hire	2026
United Cooperatives, Inc.	MO	Richard Selby	Daniel Clark	CEO	Succession (internal)	2025

Cut Through The Biological Noise To Find Real ROI

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 21:05:02 GMT

Biologicals are booming across the agricultural landscape, propelled by a surge of new products and high-octane promises. Yet, when the invoice arrives, farmers are often left with this nagging question: Did I actually need that?

University of Illinois field researcher and assistant professor Connor Sible is on a mission to provide clarity. Drawing on a decade-plus of in-field study in corn and soybean systems, Sible offers a farmer-first filter to cut through the marketing noise. His research is helping growers determine where these tools offer a reliable return on investment — and where they fall flat.

“Start with your agronomy, then decide if a biological adds value on top,” he advises. “They’re not a shortcut around good fundamentals.”

One of the key reasons why farmers struggle to cut through the noise and identify which biological products will work for them results from the shear number of biological products in the marketplace. Another challenge is what this class of products is called. Academia and regulators use the term biostimulants. Ag media, companies and most farmers increasingly use the broader term biologicals.

The 2025 crop biostimulant list was capped at 450 companies. Sible notes that most companies offer multiple products, so if the chart were redrawn by product labels instead of company logos, it would “get out of control pretty quickly.” In his own review of just row-crop (corn, wheat, soy) products, he examined 155 products and found 139 unique microbial species used as active ingredients.

(Connor Sible Presentation)

The Baseline: Deliver on Fundamentals

For all the excitement surrounding biologicals, Sible encourages farmers to focus on unglamorous agronomic foundations first. He describes biologicals as next-step inputs; they can sharpen a high-performing cropping system, but they will not rescue one built on outdated practices.

“I do not know of a biostimulant or biological today that will fix your pH,” Sible says. “If you’ve got a soil pH issue, fix that first. Same with drainage, and same with using the same hybrid you’ve used for six years just because it’s still available.”

The Logistics: Is it Dead or Alive?

Once the fundamentals are solid, Sible says a practical next step is to consider whether a product is living or non-living.

Beneficial microbes — such as nitrogen-fixers, phosphorus-solubilizers, residue degraders, and many seed-applied inoculants — are alive. Many biostimulants — including humic and fulvic acids, certain enzymes, and kelp- or marine-based formulations — are not.

That distinction isn’t just academic; it determines whether a product has any chance of working by the time it reaches your field.

“If you’re buying something living, you’re buying a responsibility,” Sible says. “You have to keep it alive from delivery to application.”

He urges farmers to evaluate their shop conditions: Can you provide temperature stability? Is the product sitting against an uninsulated exterior wall? If the logistics of babysitting a living organism do not fit your management style, Sible suggests using only non-living biostimulants.

Nutrient Efficiency: Boosting Nitrogen

Few biological categories have generated as much buzz as nitrogen fixers. Sible’s work suggests they can play a role — but not the one many farmers might first imagine.

For a typical corn crop, about half the nitrogen comes from applied fertilizer and about half from soil organic matter and mineralization.

Biological N fixers are best thought of as a third source of nitrogen, he says, helping to cover shortfalls when fertilizer is lost or tied up, or soil mineralization doesn’t keep pace with crop demand.

From his data on a 230-bushel corn crop, the key number is 7 pounds of nitrogen per acre per day. That’s how much the plant must take up every day for about three weeks at peak demand. At 300 bushels, that jumps to around 9 pounds per acre per day. One of the questions farmers need to ask their retailer on a nitrogen-fixing biological they’re considering is, how much will it help provide during the key periods of demand?

Corn requires significant amounts of nitrogen during key growth stages to deliver a 230-bushel corn crop. The demand makes it hugely challenging for a biological to deliver sufficient N as a standalone product.

(Connor Sible)

Sible makes two critical points:

Don’t cut N and expect a biological to fully replace it.
When growers drop early-season nitrogen in hopes that microbes will fill the gap, his team often sees corn respond by reducing kernel set. The yield ceiling falls before the biological has time to colonize and contribute.
Placement and mode of action matter.
Products marketed as N fixers don’t all work the same way. Some colonize roots externally, some live inside the plant as endophytes, and some may enhance N assimilation rather than truly fixing atmospheric N. That affects:
- Whether they’re best applied in-furrow, on-seed or foliar.
- What they can be tank-mixed with.
- When they’ll begin supplying nitrogen.

Farmers trialing N-fixing products this season should treat them as insurance or a supplement and not a license to slash N rates across the board, Sible advises.

Phosphorus-Solubilizing Microbes

Soils often hold a high volume of total phosphorus, but much of it is locked in forms plants cannot access. Certain microbes can free up this nutrient by secreting weak organic acids that chelate soil cations away from phosphate.

In field trials, the most consistent benefits occurred when microbes were supplied in-furrow or very near the roots and applied alongside phosphorus fertilizer. Using “difference methods” to track uptake, Sible reports that baseline efficiencies often sat between 4% and 7%. With a P-solubilizing product, that jumped to the 7% to 11% range in some environments.

“It’s still not great, but it nearly doubled our efficiency in some environments,” he says. However, he cautions that cutting fertilizer back significantly and expecting microbes to “mine” the difference is not a reliable strategy.

The Carbon Battle: Residue Management

Residue degradation is where Sible sees some of the strongest opportunities for biologicals, especially in high-yield or no-till systems.

Every 10 bushels of corn adds about 440 pounds of residue; over a decade, a yield gain of 25 bushels can mean an extra half-ton of residue per acre.

The challenge is the high carbon-to-sulfur ratio in corn stalks, which ties up nutrients. Sible’s research has found that biological degraders are inconsistent on their own but show significant synergy when paired with nitrogen and sulfur.

“If you’re going to use these, understand they’re fighting an uphill battle against carbon,” Sible says.

He also stresses application timing: “Spray on cloudy days or in the evening to take advantage of overnight dew. You have to set the product up to succeed.”

Carbon and Humic Products

When evaluating humic acids and molasses-type products (sugar), Sible notes a clear divide between crops. In soybeans, results have been largely inconsistent. In corn, however, in-furrow carbon and humic products produced small but consistent yield gains that held up under economic analysis.

Sible attributes this to crop physiology. Corn makes major yield decisions twice: during early vegetative stages (kernel potential) and at pollination (kernel retention). Supporting the plant during these specific windows has offered a measurable response.

Soybeans, by contrast, adjust yield daily from flowering through seed fill, making them a much harder target for a single application of a biostimulant.

Stress-Mitigating Products

Sible sees value in some stress-mitigating products — often kelp or marine extracts — that claim to help crops tolerate drought, heat or other abiotic stress. He notes these materials are often rich in metabolites that help plants survive extreme fluctuations in temperature, moisture and salinity.

When applied to crop leaves, these materials can trigger stress-defense pathways.But they only work if they’re applied before the stress hits.

“You have to be proactive, not reactive,” Sible says. “If the corn is already curled or the soybean leaves are flipped over, it’s too late for these products to do much.”

He tells farmers to watch their 7- to 10-day forecasts and time applications ahead of expected heat waves or dry spells, adding that these products are ineffective as rescue treatments.

From Products to Purpose

Across all categories of biological products, Sible’s advice remains the same: define your “why.” If a product doesn’t clearly fit a specific goal — such as improving N efficiency at peak uptake or accelerating residue breakdown — it may not be worth the investment.

“There are some really exciting tools out there,” Sible says. “But the value comes when you use them precisely, not when you expect them to fix everything.”

As farmers evaluate biological products, Sible notes there are about 10 frequently used types of “active ingredients” that are better-understood, likely credible and worth evaluating. They include:

Bacillus amyloliquefaciens
Bacillus subtilis
Bradyrhizobium spp. (classic soybean inoculant – “the original biological”)
Azospirillum spp.
Trichoderma spp.
Azotobacter spp.
Several other Bacillus and related species are in the top-10 list, as well.

Sible’s framing of these for farmers’ consideration:
If a new product contains one or more of these top 10 species, it “fits the larger narrative of this market.”
If it has something totally different, it might be:
— a random/unproven one-off, or
— truly novel and promising – but in that case he suggests being more cautious and asking more questions.

Treat Soil Moisture Like A Checkbook To Sharpen Irrigation Decisions

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 21:07:09 GMT

As irrigation costs climb and weather grows more erratic, farmers are under pressure to make every inch of water count. One of the simplest, most practical tools they can use this season won’t require new hardware on the pivot — just a different way of thinking about soil moisture.

North Dakota State University associate professor and irrigation engineer Dean Steele encourages farmers to manage soil water like their checkbook: track deposits and withdrawals, and don’t let the account get overdrawn. That mindset, he says, is the foundation of better irrigation timing and improved efficiency.

“The soil is our bank account. We’ve got withdrawals and deposits,” he notes. “Your deposits are the rain and irrigation. Your withdrawals are the crop water use and things like the deep percolation and maybe some runoff.”

The soil profile starts each growing season with a certain balance of water. Every day, evapotranspiration (ET) — the combined effect of evaporation from the soil and transpiration from the crop — pulls moisture out. Rain and irrigation add it back in.

Just as with a financial account, it’s not enough to know how much “money” moves in and out over a year. What also matters is when it moves — especially during critical periods like tasseling or grain fill, Steele says.

Why Seasonal Totals Can Mislead

Steele uses a favorite classroom trick question to show why irrigation timing is so important.

He asks students: If a crop needs 18 inches of ET over a season and the farm receives 12 inches of rain, how much irrigation is required?

The obvious answer is six inches. But that is incorrect.

“If all the rain of that 12 inches comes on May 1, and you get nothing the rest of the season, then you still need 18 inches,” Steele explains.

In that scenario, early-season rain may fill the soil profile, but if it’s not replenished as the crop draws water in July and August, the soil account will be overdrawn exactly when the plant is most sensitive to stress.

The lesson, Steele says, is that seasonal totals hide risk. Farmers need to track the running balance in the soil, not just the sum of rainfall and irrigation on a yearly chart.

Build A Simple Water-Balance Ledger

Steele says growers can implement a practical water-balance approach with tools many already have: a rain gauge, basic ET information and records of irrigation events, often available in their spreadsheet.

A basic checkbook-style water balance would include these four elements:

1. Starting balance: Estimate available water in the rooting zone at planting (for example, after pre-watering or spring recharge).

2. Daily withdrawals: Use ET estimates (from local weather networks, Extension tools or ET calculators) to subtract crop water use.

3. Daily deposits:
- Add effective rainfall (total rain minus runoff or obvious losses).
- Add irrigation applied (inches per pass or per revolution).

4. Running balance: Track how much water remains in the effective root zone relative to field capacity and a chosen depletion limit.

Steele compares ET and side losses to an unavoidable set of expenses — “groceries… housing and taxes” — that must be paid out of the account every day. If those outflows consistently exceed deposits, the crop will eventually experience stress long before the calendar suggests it should.

Adapting The Method To Different Climates

The same accounting framework applies whether you farm in the upper Midwest or the High Plains, but the numbers in the ledger will look very different.

In North Dakota, Steele notes, seasonal ET is relatively modest and summer rainfall sometimes helps “catch up,” meaning there can be more opportunities to pause or reduce irrigation when rainstorms arrive.

In the central and southern High Plains the withdrawals are much larger, according to Brian Arnall, a precision nutrient management Extension specialist at Oklahoma State University.

“Our max ETs can easily hit three‑quarters of an inch a day; our normal ET is half an inch,” Arnall says.

With 100-degree days, 30% humidity and rapidly growing corn, the soil account in the High Plains empties fast. That’s why, in many of those systems, pivots rarely shut off once they’re started, notes Arnall.

“By the end of our cropping season, we’ll probably be right at neutral, if not negative, as far as total ET and application,” he says.

For growers in Arnall’s area, the checkbook model confirms that almost constant deposits are required just to keep pace — and it can help reveal when small interruptions in irrigation might tip the balance into stress.

Match Irrigation To Crop Root Depth And Soil Type

Steele emphasizes that the size of a farmer’s “bank account” also depends on crop rooting depth and soil characteristics. Deep‑rooted corn on heavier soils can draw from a larger reservoir; potatoes on sandy ground with shallow roots cannot, he notes.

“With a corn crop… two‑thirds of an inch, that’s not a lot of water,” Steele says. In potato ground, by contrast, “if you’re managing 12 inches or 18 inches of root zone depth, that’s maybe what you’ve got to work with, so you’ve got to be around the circle more frequently.”

For farmers, that means:

In deep profiles with good water-holding capacity, the starting moisture balance is higher, and the system can tolerate larger withdrawals between irrigations.
In shallow or sandy profiles, the usable balance is small, so even modest daily ET can rapidly overdraw the account unless irrigations are more frequent.

Using The Ledger To Time Irrigation

Once a farmer has a running soil water balance, the irrigation decision can become a more disciplined approach. Steele advises growers to:

1. Irrigate when the projected balance approaches a chosen depletion threshold, not just when the soil surface looks dry.

2. Adjust application depth so that deposits match likely withdrawals over the next several days, considering forecast ET and possible rainfall.

3. Plan ahead for long pivot runs or “wipers,” where the time needed to complete a pass can allow the far end of the field to spend down its account before the irrigation system returns to that point in the field.

Steele says that on complex systems like windshield‑wiper pivots, he would pay special attention to water balance at both the starting and ending points.

“If I had a windshield wiper, I’d want to keep track of the starting and ending points and see how I’m doing, to make sure… you get back to that starting point in time,” he explains.

In practice, this might mean increasing application depth on certain passes, slowing the pivot at critical growth stages or strategically skipping lower‑risk areas where the account is still healthy.

Adding Sensors And ET Tools To The Checkbook

While Steele’s checkbook analogy can be implemented with simple records, it also provides a framework for using more advanced tech tools. Soil moisture sensors can serve as “bank statements,” verifying that the modeled balance matches reality. ET models and remote sensing can sharpen estimates of daily withdrawals, especially as researchers develop radar‑ and satellite‑based crop water use tools.

“There are people using satellite imagery as part of developing an integrated irrigation management system ... they’re keeping track of weather and soils and doing some estimation of crop water needs, and trying to estimate when the crop is going to need water, and then actually run the irrigation system,” Steele says.

In addition, local irrigation dealers and irrigation equipment manufacturers have apps and tools for managing water in the field, including variable rate irrigation. These tools are typically integrated into phone or desktop apps linked to the control panel of the irrigation system.

He suggests all of these technologies should feed into answering the same core questions: What is my soil water balance today, and what will it be if I do — or don’t — irrigate?

Manage Water Like Money

Behind the math and models, Steele’s message is that farmers who manage soil water like their money are better positioned to use irrigation when it delivers the highest return.

By tracking deposits and withdrawals, recognizing that “when” matters as much as “how much,” and understanding how soil and climate shape their account size, growers can head into this season with a clearer picture of where every inch of water is going — and whether it’s truly helping their crop.

Listen to more of Steele and Arnall’s recommendations on The Crop Podcast Show here .

Industry Insight: See How Your Business Compares With Pay and Benefits for Key Roles

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 17:04:23 GMT

As a service business, an ag retailer is dependent on a strong team with dependable, professional and knowledgeable individuals. Every year as an industry benchmark for recruiting, retaining and engaging employees, The Scoop conducts an email survey about compensation — salary and benefits.

The 2026 survey had more than 110 responses across 26 states with all individuals holding managerial or supervisory roles. The top states for responses were California, Iowa and Minnesota.